Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C21BFC433EF for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235924AbhLHPZL (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2021 10:25:11 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:59888 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235895AbhLHPZJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Dec 2021 10:25:09 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1B8DHgxN009674; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:33 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=pp1; bh=toawrVvCPUHpquufnA13Q37Azo2nGAGLi9oPn89p26o=; b=BjHblkrI34tFTT0g634fePquHwWgtzK1rxOR3hdEe2SBlbxNRWTobg4CFWOeSipOI9zc GyhNpLSs9hrBPsaLNCslaqpdTQ4TNmhNcpcWvD02XTEG0H5AWFAQt+glCIAQpv0mtqah cq+ePOAQMwrsT4TjkFdz9wr2gV26gBAh5qU9EjGD82tBTo7c7jgcebBdQtLBm2jh13OR i1nSHwRHWEmtzgq+VNdUCmnFJOCpmBnpYqHu25ImmMOCnCmg26eGDPyqzmv6PaitbJ5O Z3Eglg6CpilTV0PVX1AGnt/2oOWqSiRDCMyUfz1tZmlCQPa9fwu2DgnC68A1Q/3IXXYq Hw== Received: from ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (ba.79.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.121.186]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3ctwfcapyw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:21:33 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1B8FCM4w028250; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:32 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.29]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3cqyy8cdpn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:21:32 +0000 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 1B8FLVOx50004464 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:31 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41B3AB206B; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F34B2065; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (unknown [9.211.99.77]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:21:30 +0000 (GMT) From: Nathan Lynch To: Laurent Dufour Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/pseries: read the lpar name from the firmware In-Reply-To: <21eb4749-42b1-da78-8833-00d360fa36e5@linux.ibm.com> References: <20211203154321.13168-1-ldufour@linux.ibm.com> <87bl1so588.fsf@linux.ibm.com> <878rwwny1l.fsf@linux.ibm.com> <21eb4749-42b1-da78-8833-00d360fa36e5@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 09:21:29 -0600 Message-ID: <874k7jnmva.fsf@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 5SUFZv8zyIlLHlETlpA7y8qaT_Ol3sDl X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 5SUFZv8zyIlLHlETlpA7y8qaT_Ol3sDl X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2021-12-08_06,2021-12-08_01,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112080093 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Laurent Dufour writes: > On 07/12/2021, 18:07:50, Nathan Lynch wrote: >> Laurent Dufour writes: >>> On 07/12/2021, 15:32:39, Nathan Lynch wrote: >>>> Is there a reasonable fallback for VMs where this parameter doesn't >>>> exist? PowerVM partitions should always have it, but what do we want the >>>> behavior to be on other hypervisors? >>> >>> In that case, there is no value displayed in the /proc/powerpc/lparcfg and >>> the lparstat -i command will fall back to the device tree value. I can't >>> see any valid reason to report the value defined in the device tree >>> here. >> >> Here's a valid reason :-) >> >> lparstat isn't the only possible consumer of the interface, and the >> 'ibm,partition-name' property and the dynamic system parameter clearly >> serve a common purpose. 'ibm,partition-name' is provided by qemu. > > If the hypervisor is not providing this value, this is not the goal of this > interface to fetch it from the device tree. > > Any consumer should be able to fall back on the device tree value, and > there is no added value to do such a trick in the kernel when it can be > done in the user space. There is value in imposing a level of abstraction so that the semantics are: * Report the name assigned to the guest by the hosting environment, if available as opposed to * Return the string returned by a RTAS call to ibm,get-system-parameter with token 55, if implemented The benefit is that consumers of lparcfg do not have to be coded with the knowledge that "if a partition_name= line is absent, the ibm,get-system-parameter RTAS call must have failed, so now I should read /sys/firmware/devicetree/base/ibm,partition_name." That's the sort of esoterica that is appropriate for the kernel to encapsulate. And I'd say the effort involved (falling back to a root node property lookup) is proportional to the benefit.