From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3 06/14] rocker: introduce worlds infrastructure
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:14:09 +0200
Message-ID: <20151007061409.GB2152@nanopsycho.orion>
References: <1444117913-10386-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <1444117913-10386-7-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <CAE4R7bCdAQxLo3tKbXAqyGa_F3PhUTUkqrM5jTkYqcJJbCDmog@mail.gmail.com>
 <5613F482.2010200@gmail.com>
 <CAE4R7bAhc1HyrCxQfbfXUhQgME=UfjdVtF5PAyxy1Oe5g5EoTw@mail.gmail.com>
 <56143C50.2050604@gmail.com>
 <CAE4R7bBzidcLVgP7TybtHDHhgmQv1FAY9toyDDmSa8Y5bhg-zw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>, eladr@mellanox.com,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
To: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com ([209.85.212.180]:36591 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751365AbbJGGOM (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 7 Oct 2015 02:14:12 -0400
Received: by wicgb1 with SMTP id gb1so195300079wic.1
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 06 Oct 2015 23:14:11 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAE4R7bBzidcLVgP7TybtHDHhgmQv1FAY9toyDDmSa8Y5bhg-zw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:50:08AM CEST, sfeldma@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

>
>> Also I wonder how this works when a pkt ingresses a port in mode A and
>> egresses a port in mode B? What fib/fdb tables does it cross when this
>> happens? It seems easier to just have two switch devices not a
>> hybrid. If this per port implementation maps to some hardware that
>> would be really interesting though.
>
>In retrospect, I regret adding the port mode feature to rocker.  I
>like the world idea, so we can have a device with different
>pipeline/resources, but we should have locked all ports on a switch to
>one mode, or even as you hinted at earlier, use a unique sub-device ID
>for a switch with all ports in a particular mode.  If you want to
>ports with different worlds, just instantiate a switch in each world.
>Instantiating new devices is easy.
>
>But, now Jiri has locked on to the dynamic port mode idea with pit
>bull zeal, to the point of being able to switch a port mode at any
>time from one mode to another from the host.  I just don't see that as
>a real-world use-case.  Life is too short and we need to be focusing
>on switchdev features, not refactoring or adding cool but useless
>features.

Can can still change this if you want. We can make
ROCKER_TLV_CMD_PORT_SETTINGS_MODE read-only in hw (As it is in fact now
as we have only one world).

Then we add another property:
static Property rocker_properties[] = {
	    DEFINE_PROP_STRING("name", Rocker, name),
	    DEFINE_PROP_STRING("world", Rocker, world),
		....

and we use this value in pci_rocker_init instead of r->world_dflt

Looks straightforward.