From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3 04/17] net: introduce generic switch devices support Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 10:51:03 -0500 Message-ID: <5474A567.4040401@mojatatu.com> References: <1416911328-10979-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <1416911328-10979-5-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, andy@greyhouse.net, tgraf@suug.ch, dborkman@redhat.com, ogerlitz@mellanox.com, jesse@nicira.com, pshelar@nicira.com, azhou@nicira.com, ben@decadent.org.uk, stephen@networkplumber.org, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, vyasevic@redhat.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, john.r.fastabend@intel.com, edumazet@google.com, sfeldma@gmail.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, linville@tuxdriver.com, jasowang@redhat.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com, ryazanov.s.a@gmail.com, buytenh@wantstofly.org, aviadr@mellanox.com, nbd@openwrt.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, Neil.Jerram@metaswitch.com, ronye@mellanox.com, simon.horman@netronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@redhat.com, john.ronciak@intel.com, mleitner@redhat.com, shrijeet@gmail.com, gospo@cumulusnetworks.com, bcrl@kvack.org To: Jiri Pirko , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:46513 "EHLO mail-ig0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751067AbaKYPvK (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Nov 2014 10:51:10 -0500 Received: by mail-ig0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hn15so5225401igb.7 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:51:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1416911328-10979-5-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/25/14 05:28, Jiri Pirko wrote: > The goal of this is to provide a possibility to support various switch > chips. Drivers should implement relevant ndos to do so. Now there is > only one ndo defined: > - for getting physical switch id is in place. > I am not sure switch id is the right term. I have a network processor that *does not* do switching. I am not sure if "chip" or "ASIC" or "offload_id" would be the right term. switch doesnt sound right. cheers, jamal