From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com ([74.125.82.66]:38407 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751427AbeCWGhK (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 02:37:10 -0400
Received: by mail-wm0-f66.google.com with SMTP id l16so1565124wmh.3
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 23:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 07:37:08 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, idosch@mellanox.com,
        mlxsw@mellanox.com, andrew@lunn.ch,
        vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
        michael.chan@broadcom.com, ganeshgr@chelsio.com,
        saeedm@mellanox.com, simon.horman@netronome.com,
        pieter.jansenvanvuuren@netronome.com, john.hurley@netronome.com,
        dirk.vandermerwe@netronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@intel.com,
        ogerlitz@mellanox.com, dsahern@gmail.com, vijaya.guvva@cavium.com,
        satananda.burla@cavium.com, raghu.vatsavayi@cavium.com,
        felix.manlunas@cavium.com, gospo@broadcom.com,
        sathya.perla@broadcom.com, vasundhara-v.volam@broadcom.com,
        tariqt@mellanox.com, eranbe@mellanox.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 00/12] devlink: introduce port flavours and
 common phys_port_name generation
Message-ID: <20180323063708.GL2074@nanopsycho.orion>
References: <20180322105522.8186-1-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <20180322203447.1e399382@cakuba.netronome.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180322203447.1e399382@cakuba.netronome.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 04:34:47AM CET, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:55:10 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Also, there is one extra port that I don't understand what
>> is the purpose for it - something nfp specific perhaps.
>
>Do you mean the PF netdev?  There can be multiple of those on
>multi-host cards.  There is one pf_repr from ASIC's perspective and a
>full-blown PF netdev which should be used by applications.  pf_repr is
>only for switch config.

Got it.