Re: [RFC net-next 0/4] devlink: Add boot-time defaults

[Jiri Pirko]

Sun, May 10, 2026 at 06:37:32PM +0200, kuba@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>On Sat, 9 May 2026 09:01:23 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Sat, May 09, 2026 at 02:52:13AM +0200, kuba@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> >On Fri, 8 May 2026 20:07:44 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:  
>> >legacy vs switchdev only describes the eswitch configuration.
>> >As a non-SR-IOV user I really don't want to see the extra representors
>> >hanging around my systems, confusing all daemons. IIRC mlx5 had some
>> >limitations around the uplink representor. Maybe that's the disconnect.
>> >But for a real, fully featured switchdev eswitches having the
>> >PHY and PF representors on boot, always, will not make sense.  
>> 
>> As "a non-SR-IOV user", what extra representors you talk about? When you
>> have pfs only, you don't have anything extra. Just 1 netdev per-pf, one
>> devlink port per-pf. What's extra about it? When you don't have VFs/SFs.
>> Everyhing is the same:
>
>Some devices have separate uplink ports and PF representors.
>As I said, what you're proposing isn't going to work for all drivers.

Well, the point is, mlx5 appears to the the one needing this, not other
drivers. What I'm trying to point at, mlx5 should not need this.
It makes things compicated, adding a ugly knob for no good reason.
Legacy/switchdev mode, in both, the non-sriov/eswitch user should not
see different behaviour. The mode is an eswitch attribute.

   devlink dev eswitch set - sets devlink device eswitch attributes
       mode { legacy | switchdev }
              Set eswitch mode

              legacy - Legacy SRIOV

              switchdev - SRIOV switchdev offloads


Briefly looking over other drivers, looks like ice, bnxt, octeon, sfc,
there is no new entity created in case of switching to switchdev mode.
The only driver that creates separate pf entities seems to be nfp,
but the mode seems to be determined by the app being run (loaded
firmware).

Am I missing something?


>
>> >> Well, as any other nv config, it persists across kernels/hosts.
>> >> Think about it as "unbreak-my-not-legacy-device" bit.  
>> >
>> >For most devices the switchdev mode does not change anything
>> >substantial about the device. It's purely a kernel / driver config. 
>> >It changes what objects and default rules kernel / driver installs. 
>> >So I don't get why it would make sense to flash into the device
>> >nvmem a Linux SW stack specific config.  
>> 
>> I look at it from the perspective that from some CX generation,
>> switchdev mode should be default. So that is a device-based decision.
>> I believe as such it can optionally be permanenty configured (nv config)
>> on older device. Why not?
>
>Feels a bit arbitrary and won't cover all cases. The question should be

What cases it does not cover? I don't follow.


>why you are nacking a more reasonable solution. Keeping Linux config in
>Linux params.

What's reasonable about adding basically a module option (kernel cmdline
is pretty much the same) for no reason?