From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/4] introduce infrastructure for support of
 switch chip datapath
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:20:17 +0100
Message-ID: <20140326132017.GE2869@minipsycho.orion>
References: <20140322094852.GB2844@minipsycho.orion>
 <5330BAB7.3040501@mojatatu.com>
 <20140325173927.GE8102@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <20140325180009.GB15723@casper.infradead.org>
 <20140325193533.GF8102@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <5331ED86.7020704@mojatatu.com>
 <20140325211945.GC15723@casper.infradead.org>
 <20140326072148.GB2869@minipsycho.orion>
 <5332B365.6050807@mojatatu.com>
 <5332B4A0.2070505@mojatatu.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, andy@greyhouse.net,
	dborkman@redhat.com, ogerlitz@mellanox.com, jesse@nicira.com,
	pshelar@nicira.com, azhou@nicira.com,
	Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, vyasevic <vyasevic@redhat.com>,
	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@cumulusnetworks.com>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@wantstofly.org>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-ee0-f52.google.com ([74.125.83.52]:44019 "EHLO
	mail-ee0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751580AbaCZNUV (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:20:21 -0400
Received: by mail-ee0-f52.google.com with SMTP id e49so1602997eek.25
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 06:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5332B4A0.2070505@mojatatu.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:06:08PM CET, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote:
>On 03/26/14 07:00, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>>On 03/26/14 03:21, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Creating bonding of the switch ports does not fit into the picture at
>>>all.
>
>Sorry wanted to respond to the bonding part but my fingers kept typing;->
>
>If it cant do bonding and the chip is capable of LAGging, it is simply
>the wrong approach. I dont think what has been described so far will
>have a problem doing bonding.

I think that bonding (bonding driver or any of bonding driver interface)
should have nothing to do with the switch chip capability of link aggregation.


>
>
>
>cheers,
>jamal