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:   Mon, 8 Nov 2021 08:09:18 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Cc:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, edwin.peer@broadcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] devlink: Require devlink lock during device
 reload
Message-ID: <20211108080918.2214996c@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <YYgSzEHppKY3oYTb@unreal>
References: <9716f9a13e217a0a163b745b6e92e02d40973d2c.1635701665.git.leonro@nvidia.com>
        <YYABqfFy//g5Gdis@nanopsycho>
        <YYBTg4nW2BIVadYE@shredder>
        <20211101161122.37fbb99d@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN>
        <YYgJ1bnECwUWvNqD@shredder>
        <YYgSzEHppKY3oYTb@unreal>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 19:54:20 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > >  (3) should we let drivers take refs on the devlink instance?  
> > 
> > I think it's fine mainly because I don't expect it to be used by too
> > many drivers other than netdevsim which is somewhat special. Looking at
> > the call sites of devlink_get() in netdevsim, it is only called from
> > places (debugfs and trap workqueue) that shouldn't be present in real
> > drivers.  
> 
> Sorry, I'm obligated to ask. In which universe is it ok to create new
> set of API that no real driver should use?

I think it's common sense. We're just exporting something to make our
lives easier somewhere else in the three. Do you see a way in which
taking refs on devlink can help out-of-tree code?

BTW we can put the symbols in a namespace or under a kconfig, to aid
reviews of drivers using them if you want.