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;
From:   Coiby Xu <coiby.xu@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:37:32 +0800
To:     Benjamin Poirier <benjamin.poirier@gmail.com>
Cc:     devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>,
        Manish Chopra <manishc@marvell.com>,
        "supporter:QLOGIC QLGE 10Gb ETHERNET DRIVER" 
        <GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@marvell.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:QLOGIC QLGE 10Gb ETHERNET DRIVER" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] staging: qlge: Initialize devlink health dump
 framework for the dlge driver
Message-ID: <20201015033732.qaihehernm2jzoln@Rk>
References: <20201008115808.91850-1-coiby.xu@gmail.com>
 <20201008115808.91850-2-coiby.xu@gmail.com>
 <20201010073514.GA14495@f3>
 <20201010102416.hvbgx3mgyadmu6ui@Rk>
 <20201010134855.GB17351@f3>
 <20201012112406.6mxta2mapifkbeyw@Rk>
 <20201013003704.GA41031@f3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201013003704.GA41031@f3>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 09:37:04AM +0900, Benjamin Poirier wrote:
>On 2020-10-12 19:24 +0800, Coiby Xu wrote:
>[...]
>> > I think, but didn't check in depth, that in those drivers, the devlink
>> > device is tied to the pci device and can exist independently of the
>> > netdev, at least in principle.
>> >
>> You are right. Take drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw as an example,
>> devlink reload would first first unregister_netdev and then
>> register_netdev but struct devlink stays put. But I have yet to
>> understand when unregister/register_netdev is needed.
>
>Maybe it can be useful to manually recover if the hardware or driver
>gets in an erroneous state. I've used `modprobe -r qlge && modprobe
>qlge` for the same in the past.

Thank you for providing this user case!
>
>> Do we need to
>> add "devlink reload" for qlge?
>
>Not for this patchset. That would be a new feature.

To implement this feature, it seems I need to understand how qlge work
under the hood. For example, what's the difference between
qlge_soft_reset_mpi_risc and qlge_hard_reset_mpi_risc? Or should we use
a brute-force way like do the tasks in qlge_remove and then re-do the
tasks in qlge_probe? Is a hardware reference manual for qlge device?

--
Best regards,
Coiby