Re: [net-next,1/2] add iovnl netlink support

[Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>]

On Wednesday 21 April 2010, Scott Feldman wrote:
> On 4/21/10 12:39 PM, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> 
> >>> 1. Setting up the slave device
> >>>  a) create an SR-IOV VF to assign to a guest
> >>>  b) create a macvtap device to pass to qemu or vhost
> >>>  c) attach a tap device to a bridge
> >>>  d) create a macvlan device and put it into a container
> >>>  e) create a virtual interface for a VMDq adapter
> >> 
> >> OK, but iovnl isn't doing this.
> > 
> > The set_mac_vlan that Scott's patch adds seems to implement 1a), as far
> > as I can tell. Interestingly, this is not actually implemented in
> > the enic driver in patch 2/2. So if we all agree that this is out of the
> > scope of iovnl, let's just remove it from the interface and find another
> > way for it (ethtool, iplink, ..., as listed above).
> 
> You're right, not needed for enic since mac addr is included with
> port-profile push and vlan membership is implied by port-profile.  So I put
> set_mac_vlan in there basically to elicit feedback.

Ok. Two points though:

- when you say that the mac address is included in the port-profile push,
  does that imply that the VF does not have a mac address prior to this?
  This would again mix the NIC configuration phase with the switch
  association, which I think we really need to avoid if we want to be
  able to implement the association in user space!

- The VLAN ID being implied in the port profile seems to be another
  difference between what enic is doing and the current draft VDP
  that will eventually become 802.1Qbg, and I fear that this difference
  will be visible in the iovnl protocol.

> There really wouldn't be much different between iplink and iovnl since
> they're both rtnetlink...seems we should keep IOV-related APIs in one place.
> Maybe there are other IOV APIs to add to iovnl in the future like:
> 
>     vf <- add_vf(pf)
>     del_vf(pf, vf)
> 
> Ethtool doesn't seem the right place for this.

Right. My preference would probably be make these a subcategory of
the if_link, and use the existing RTM_NEWLINK/RTM_DELLINK commands.
This would make it resemble the existing interfaces and mean you can
use

ip link add link eth0 type macvlan    # for a container
ip link add link eth0 type macvtap    # for qemu/vhost
ip link add link eth0 type vf         # for device assignment

There are obviously significant differences between these three, but
they also share enough of their properties to let us treat them
in similar ways.

If we integrate the iovnl client into iproute2, the sequence for setting
up an enic VF and associating it to the port profile could be

# create vf0, pass mac and vlan id to HW, no association yet
ip link add link eth0 name vf0 type vf mac fe:dc:ba:12:34:56 vlan 78

# associate vf with port profile, mac address must match the one assigned
#  to the interface before.
ip iov assoc eth0 port-profile "general" host-uuid "dcf2a873-f5ee-41dd-a7ad-802a544e48c2" \
	 mac fe:dc:ba:12:34:56

	Arnd