Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 04:23:25PM CEST, mo...@nvidia.com wrote: > >On 8/19/2020 3:46 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 02:18:22PM CEST, mo...@nvidia.com 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, mo...@mellanox.com 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.
Not sure why this is any different from other commands... >
