Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:10:10 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@mellanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v2 01/13] devlink: Add reload action option
 to devlink reload command
Message-ID: <20200818171010.11e4b615@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <3ed1115e-8b44-b398-55f2-cee94ef426fd@nvidia.com>
References: <1597657072-3130-1-git-send-email-moshe@mellanox.com>
        <1597657072-3130-2-git-send-email-moshe@mellanox.com>
        <20200817163612.GA2627@nanopsycho>
        <3ed1115e-8b44-b398-55f2-cee94ef426fd@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 12:10:36 +0300 Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> On 8/17/2020 7:36 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 11:37:40AM CEST, moshe@mellanox.com wrote:  
> >> Add devlink reload action to allow the user to request a specific reload
> >> action. The action parameter is optional, if not specified then devlink
> >> driver re-init action is used (backward compatible).
> >> Note that when required to do firmware activation some drivers may need
> >> to reload the driver. On the other hand some drivers may need to reset  
> > Sounds reasonable. I think it would be good to indicate that though. Not
> > sure how...  
> 
> Maybe counters on the actions done ? Actually such counters can be 
> useful on debug, knowing what reloads we had since driver was up.

Wouldn't we need to know all types of reset of drivers may do?

I think documenting this clearly should be sufficient.

A reset counter for the _requested_ reset type (fully maintained by
core), however - that may be useful. The question "why did this NIC
reset itself / why did the link just flap" comes up repeatedly.