On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 04:47:16PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:00:19AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:57:38AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 08:29:49PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think I misunderstood Greg's subdirectory comment. We already have
> > > > directories like this:
> > >
> > > Yes, IIRC, Greg's remark applies if you have to start creating
> > > directories with manual kobjects.
> > >
> > > > and aspm_ctrl_attr_group (for "link") is nicely done with static
> > > > attributes. So I think we could do something like this:
> > > >
> > > > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:01:00.0/ # PF directory
> > > > sriov/ # SR-IOV related stuff
> > > > vf_total_msix
> > > > vf_msix_count_BB:DD.F # includes bus/dev/fn of first VF
> > > > ...
> > > > vf_msix_count_BB:DD.F # includes bus/dev/fn of last VF
> > >
> > > It looks a bit odd that it isn't a subdirectory, but this seems
> > > reasonable.
> >
> > Sorry, I missed your point; you'll have to lay it out more explicitly.
> > I did intend that "sriov" *is* a subdirectory of the 0000:01:00.0
> > directory. The full paths would be:
> >
> > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:01:00.0/sriov/vf_total_msix
> > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:01:00.0/sriov/vf_msix_count_BB:DD.F
> > ...
>
> Sorry, I was meaning what you first proposed:
>
> /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:01:00.0/sriov/BB:DD.F/vf_msix_count
>
> Which has the extra sub directory to organize the child VFs.
>
> Keep in mind there is going to be alot of VFs here, > 1k - so this
> will be a huge directory.
With 0000:01:00.0/sriov/vf_msix_count_BB:DD.F, sriov/ will contain
1 + 1K files ("vf_total_msix" + 1 per VF).
With 0000:01:00.0/sriov/BB:DD.F/vf_msix_count, sriov/ will contain
1 file and 1K subdirectories.
No real difference now, but if we add more files per VF, a BB:DD.F/
subdirectory would certainly be nicer.
I'm dense and don't fully understand Greg's subdirectory comment.
The VF will have its own "pci/devices/DDDD:BB:DD.F/" directory, so
adding sriov/BB:DD.F/ under the PF shouldn't affect any udev events or
rules for the VF.
I see "ATTR{power/control}" in lots of udev rules, so I guess udev
could manage a single subdirectory like "ATTR{sriov/vf_total_msix}".
I doubt it could do "ATTR{sriov/adm/vf_total_msix}" (with another
level) or "ATTR{sriov/BBB:DD.F/vf_msix_count}" (with variable VF text
in the path).
But it doesn't seem like that level of control would be in a udev rule
anyway. A PF udev rule might *start* a program to manage MSI-X
vectors, but such a program should be able to deal with whatever
directory structure we want.
If my uninformed udev speculation makes sense *and* we think there
will be more per-VF files later, I think I'm OK either way.
Bjorn
