From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3 04/17] net: introduce generic switch devices support Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:49:54 +0100 Message-ID: <20141125164954.GJ1971@nanopsycho.orion> References: <1416911328-10979-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <1416911328-10979-5-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <5474A567.4040401@mojatatu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, 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: Jamal Hadi Salim Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com ([209.85.212.177]:39915 "EHLO mail-wi0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751078AbaKYQt5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Nov 2014 11:49:57 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id l15so2124653wiw.4 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 08:49:56 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5474A567.4040401@mojatatu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 04:51:03PM CET, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote: >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 What does it do? "L3 switching"? >"offload_id" would be the right term. switch doesnt sound right. When we talk about this area, we use word "switch". I know it is not accurate, but in my opinion it is the closest we can get. "chip" and "ASIC" are too generic I believe. I would not use "offload" cause it wan be easily mistaken with NIC offloads + it is alsno not accurate. > >cheers, >jamal >