Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 21 Jul 2022 15:32:19 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To:     Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
Cc:     Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        "edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
        "shiraz.saleem@intel.com" <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>,
        Ajay Sharma <sharmaajay@microsoft.com>,
        "linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 03/12] net: mana: Handle vport sharing between devices
Message-ID: <20220721183219.GA6833@ziepe.ca>
References: <1655345240-26411-1-git-send-email-longli@linuxonhyperv.com>
 <1655345240-26411-4-git-send-email-longli@linuxonhyperv.com>
 <SN6PR2101MB13272044B91D6E37F7F5124FBF879@SN6PR2101MB1327.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
 <PH7PR21MB3263F08C111C5D06C99CC32ACE869@PH7PR21MB3263.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
 <20220720234209.GP5049@ziepe.ca>
 <PH7PR21MB3263F5FD2FA4BA6669C21509CE919@PH7PR21MB3263.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
 <20220721143858.GV5049@ziepe.ca>
 <PH7PR21MB326339501D9CA5ABE69F8AE9CE919@PH7PR21MB3263.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <PH7PR21MB326339501D9CA5ABE69F8AE9CE919@PH7PR21MB3263.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 05:58:39PM +0000, Long Li wrote:
> > > "vport" is a hardware resource that can either be used by an Ethernet
> > > device, or an RDMA device. But it can't be used by both at the same
> > > time. The "vport" is associated with a protection domain and doorbell,
> > > it's programmed in the hardware. Outgoing traffic is enforced on this
> > > vport based on how it is programmed.
> > 
> > Sure, but how is the users problem to "get this configured right" and what
> > exactly is the user supposed to do?
> > 
> > I would expect the allocation of HW resources to be completely transparent
> > to the user. Why is it not?
> > 
> 
> In the hardware, RDMA RAW_QP shares the same hardware resource (in
> this case, the vPort in hardware table) with the ethernet NIC. When
> an RDMA user creates a RAW_QP, we can't just shut down the
> ethernet. The user is required to make sure the ethernet is not in
> used when he creates this QP type.

You haven't answered my question - how is the user supposed to achieve
this?

And now I also want to know why the ethernet device and rdma device
can even be loaded together if they cannot share the physical port?
Exclusivity is not a sharing model that any driver today implements.

Jason