From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/4] introduce infrastructure for support of switch chip datapath Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 17:59:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20140326165934.GH2869@minipsycho.orion> References: <532C2AC4.7080303@mojatatu.com> <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> <5332677F.2090404@cumulusnetworks.com> <5332B1FE.7080102@mojatatu.com> <53330639.8050403@cumulusnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim , Florian Fainelli , Neil Horman , Thomas Graf , netdev , David Miller , Andy Gospodarek , dborkman , ogerlitz , jesse , pshelar , azhou , Ben Hutchings , Stephen Hemminger , jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, vyasevic , Cong Wang , John Fastabend , Eric Dumazet , Scott Feldman , Lennert Buytenhek , Shrijeet Mukherjee To: Roopa Prabhu Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-f49.google.com ([74.125.83.49]:53481 "EHLO mail-ee0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755876AbaCZQ7j (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Mar 2014 12:59:39 -0400 Received: by mail-ee0-f49.google.com with SMTP id c41so1863038eek.22 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53330639.8050403@cumulusnetworks.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 05:54:17PM CET, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com wrote: >On 3/26/14, 3:54 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>On 03/26/14 01:37, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >>>On 3/25/14, 1:11 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote: >>>>2014-03-25 12:35 GMT-07:00 Neil Horman : >> >>>Sorry about getting on this thread late and possibly in the middle. >>>Agree on the idea of keeping the ports linked to the master switch dev >>>(or the 'conduit' to the switch chip) via private list instead of the >>>master-slave relationship proposed earlier. >>>By private i mean the netdev->priv linkage to the master switch dev and >>>not really keeping the ports from being exposed to the user. >>> >>>We think its better to keep the switch ports exposed as any other netdev >>>on linux. >>> This approach will make the switch ports look exactly like a nic port >>>and all tools will continue to work seamlessly. The switch port >>>operations could internally be forwarded to the switch netdev (sw1 in >>>the above case). >>> >>>example: >>>$ip link set dev sw1p0 up >>>$ethtool -S sw1p0 >>> >> >>I like the approach. I know the above is a simple version, but i am >>assuming you also mean i can do things like >>ip route add ... >>bridge fdb add ... (and if you like your brctl go ahead) >>bonding ... >> >yes, exactly. We support this model on our boxes today. >User can bond switch ports on our box in the exact same way as he/she >would bond two nic ports. >Our 'conduit to switch chip' reflects the corresponding lag >configuration in the switch chip. >Same goes for bridging, routing, acls. So you implement bonding netlink api? Or you hook into bonding driver itselt? Can you show us the code? > >Thanks, >Roopa