From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mms2.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.18]:4185 "EHLO mms2.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750754Ab2GPJUD (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 05:20:03 -0400 Message-ID: <5003DC9B.8000706@broadcom.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 12:19:23 +0300 From: "Yuval Mintz" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "davem@davemloft.net" cc: "Chris Friesen" , "Ben Hutchings" , "Greg Rose" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: New commands to configure IOV features References: <4FA7AF62.8000405@broadcom.com> <20120507081634.000003f8.gregory.v.rose@intel.com> <4FE9A963.7020602@broadcom.com> <20120626101903.0000791c@unknown> <1341859155.2535.43.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com> <4FFB4985.3040507@genband.com> In-Reply-To: <4FFB4985.3040507@genband.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >>>> If I want to pick the RFCs and add support for configuring the number >>>> of VFs - do you think ethtool's the right place for such added >>>> support? >>>> >>> I think a PCI utility tool would be better, SR-IOV is not limited to >>> network devices. That's one of the reasons I dropped the RFC. I >>> haven't gotten back to the idea since then due to my day job keeping me >>> pretty busy. >> >> For what it's worth, I agree with this. > > From my perspective it would be ideal if this could be exported via /sys or something > Well, obviously unless there was a sudden change in our stance regarding sysfs we will not head that way. This thread got no replies from the pci community, and I'm unfamiliar with such a tool. Dave, What's your stance in the matter - do you wish us to continue pursuing some pci tool (which might or might not exist), or instead work on a networking solution to this issue? Do you happen to know such a tool? Thanks, Yuval