* Why SR-IOV Shared Port and not vSwitch?
@ 2015-01-28 0:14 Vangelis Tasoulas
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Vangelis Tasoulas @ 2015-01-28 0:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux RDMA Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 751 bytes --]
Hello,
I was looking into the InfiniBand SR-IOV implementation and as I see here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org/msg11956.html
the shared port model has been implemented in the drivers.
In an ~5 years old presentation from Liran Liss
(https://www.openfabrics.org/index.php/ofa-documents/doc_view/255-infiniband-and-rocee-virtualization-with-sr-iov.html),
the virtual switch model is briefly mentioned as well.
The disadvantage of the virtual switch model (that is mentioned in the
presentation as well) is the bloated LID space. Is there any other good
reason (or great disadvantage of the the vSwitch model) that the
shared-port has been chosen in favor of the vSwitch?
Vangelis
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2015-01-28 0:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-01-28 0:14 Why SR-IOV Shared Port and not vSwitch? Vangelis Tasoulas
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).