From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3 04/17] net: introduce generic switch devices support Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:13:18 +0900 Message-ID: <20141127031315.GD1649@vergenet.net> References: <1416911328-10979-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <1416911328-10979-5-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <5474A567.4040401@mojatatu.com> <20141125164954.GJ1971@nanopsycho.orion> <5474B795.3080204@mojatatu.com> <20141125215402.GA3912@casper.infradead.org> <54754A10.6020601@mojatatu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Thomas Graf , Jiri Pirko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, andy@greyhouse.net, 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, alexander.h.duyck@redhat.com, john.ronciak@intel.com, mleitner@redhat.com, shrijeet@gmail.com, gospo@cumulusnetworks.com, bcrl@kvack To: Jamal Hadi Salim Return-path: Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com ([209.85.192.181]:64552 "EHLO mail-pd0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751882AbaK0DNn (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2014 22:13:43 -0500 Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id z10so4030492pdj.12 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:13:42 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54754A10.6020601@mojatatu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:33:36PM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On 11/25/14 16:54, Thomas Graf wrote: > >On 11/25/14 at 12:08pm, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >=20 > >It would definitely help if you could expose some more details on th= e > >"some network processor" you have. We're all very eager ;-) > > >=20 > Well, this thing doesnt run ovs ;-> (/me runs). If you come > to netdev i may let you play with it ;-> Its a humongous device > (think multi 100G ports). >=20 > On a serious note: Even if you took what Simon/Netronome has > (yes, I know they use ovs;->) =46WIW, we are also interested in non-OVS use cases. > - there is really no need for a switch > abstraction *at all* if all you want to is hang a packet > processing graph that ingresses at a port and egress at another port. > As you know, Linux supports it just fine with tc. I may be missing the point but I see two problems that are solved by the switch abstraction. - Cases where no ports are configured. Perhaps no such use cases exist for the API in question. But it does seem plausible to me that non-physical ports could be added at run-time and that thus a "switch" could initially exist with no configured port. Something like how bridges initially have no ports (IIRC). - Discovering the association between ports and "switches". My recollection from the double round table discussion on the last day = of the D=C3=BCsseldorf sessions was that these were reasons that simply ac= cessing any port belonging to the "switch" were not entirely satisfactory. > >I'm with Jiri but I agree it's not a perfect fit. I doubt there is b= ut > >if you can come up with something that fits better I'm open to it. > > > >I considered "dataplane" or "dp" for a bit but it's quite generic as > >well. > > >=20 > The purpose is to offload. I think any name would be better than > mapping it to a specific abstraction called "switch". Especially > if it is hanging off a port and there is no switch in the pipeline. >=20 > cheers, > jamal