Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v2 01/13] devlink: Add reload action option to devlink reload command

[Moshe Shemesh]

On 8/19/2020 3:46 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 02:18:22PM CEST, moshe@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On 8/19/2020 3:10 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > 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@xxxxxxxxxxxx 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?
> >
> > Right, we can't tell all reset types driver may have, but we can tell which
> > reload actions were done.
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > I will add counters on which reload were done. reload_down()/up() can return
> > which actions were actually done and devlink will show counters.
> Why a counter? Just return what was done over netlink reply.


Such counters can be useful for debugging, telling which reload actions 
were done on this dev from the point it was up.