From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 V8 PATCH 1/2] Add netlink support for virtual port management Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 17:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100517.174745.02261900.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100515010429.21260.46950.stgit@savbu-pc100.cisco.com> <20100515031130.GD5798@x200.localdomain> <201005151107.51522.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: chrisw@redhat.com, scofeldm@cisco.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kaber@trash.net To: arnd@arndb.de Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:53790 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752759Ab0ERArh (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2010 20:47:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <201005151107.51522.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 11:07:51 +0200 > On Saturday 15 May 2010 05:11:30 Chris Wright wrote: >> * Scott Feldman (scofeldm@cisco.com) wrote: >> > From: Scott Feldman >> > >> > Add new netdev ops ndo_{set|get}_vf_port to allow setting of >> > port-profile on a netdev interface. Extends netlink socket RTM_SETLINK/ >> > RTM_GETLINK with two new sub msgs called IFLA_VF_PORTS and IFLA_PORT_SELF >> > (added to end of IFLA_cmd list). These are both nested atrtibutes >> > using this layout: >> > >> > [IFLA_NUM_VF] >> > [IFLA_VF_PORTS] >> > [IFLA_VF_PORT] >> > [IFLA_PORT_*], ... >> > [IFLA_VF_PORT] >> > [IFLA_PORT_*], ... >> > ... >> > [IFLA_PORT_SELF] >> > [IFLA_PORT_*], ... >> > >> > These attributes are design to be set and get symmetrically. VF_PORTS >> > is a list of VF_PORTs, one for each VF, when dealing with an SR-IOV >> > device. PORT_SELF is for the PF of the SR-IOV device, in case it wants >> > to also have a port-profile, or for the case where the VF==PF, like in >> > enic patch 2/2 of this patch set. >> > >> > A port-profile is used to configure/enable the external switch virtual port >> > backing the netdev interface, not to configure the host-facing side of the >> > netdev. A port-profile is an identifier known to the switch. How port- >> > profiles are installed on the switch or how available port-profiles are >> > made know to the host is outside the scope of this patch. >> > >> > There are two types of port-profiles specs in the netlink msg. The first spec >> > is for 802.1Qbg (pre-)standard, VDP protocol. The second spec is for devices >> > that run a similar protocol as VDP but in firmware, thus hiding the protocol >> > details. In either case, the specs have much in common and makes sense to >> > define the netlink msg as the union of the two specs. For example, both specs >> > have a notition of associating/deassociating a port-profile. And both specs >> > require some information from the hypervisor manager, such as client port >> > instance ID. >> > >> > The general flow is the port-profile is applied to a host netdev interface >> > using RTM_SETLINK, the receiver of the RTM_SETLINK msg communicates with the >> > switch, and the switch virtual port backing the host netdev interface is >> > configured/enabled based on the settings defined by the port-profile. What >> > those settings comprise, and how those settings are managed is again >> > outside the scope of this patch, since this patch only deals with the >> > first step in the flow. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Scott Feldman >> > Signed-off-by: Roopa Prabhu >> >> Assuming the SR-IOV VFINFO changes go in there will be some minor patch >> conflicts to be sorted out. > > Right, I assume the best resolution then would be drop IFLA_VF_PORTS and > put the IFLA_VF_PORT attribute inside IFLA_VF_INFO, correct? > >> Acked-by: Chris Wright > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann Hey guys, please respin these patches now that the SR-IOV VF patch is in the tree. Thanks!