From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@gmail.com>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
"mchan@broadcom.com" <mchan@broadcom.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
Frederick Botha <frederick.botha@netronome.com>,
nick viljoen <nick.viljoen@netronome.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: phys_port_id in switchdev mode?
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:13:22 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180831201321.GA4590@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180828204351.34fe457f@cakuba.netronome.com>
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 08:43:51PM +0200, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Ugh, CC: netdev..
>
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 20:05:39 +0200, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I wonder if we can use phys_port_id in switchdev to group together
> > interfaces of a single PCI PF? Here is the problem:
On Mellanox cards, this is already possible via phys_switch_id, as
each PF has its own phys_switch_id. So all VFs with a given
phys_switch_id belong to the PF with that same phys_switch_id.
I understand this is a vendor-specific design, but if you have the
same phys_switch_id across PFs, does it really matter on which PF the
VF was created on?
Marcelo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-01 0:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20180828200539.1c0fe607@cakuba.netronome.com>
2018-08-28 18:43 ` phys_port_id in switchdev mode? Jakub Kicinski
2018-08-31 20:13 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner [this message]
2018-09-01 11:34 ` Jakub Kicinski
2018-09-03 13:55 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-09-03 9:43 ` Or Gerlitz
2018-09-03 9:40 ` Or Gerlitz
2018-09-04 10:20 ` Jakub Kicinski
2018-09-04 20:37 ` Or Gerlitz
2018-09-05 16:43 ` Jakub Kicinski
2018-09-05 16:20 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2018-09-05 16:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180831201321.GA4590@localhost.localdomain \
--to=marcelo.leitner@gmail.com \
--cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=andy@greyhouse.net \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=frederick.botha@netronome.com \
--cc=gerlitz.or@gmail.com \
--cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nick.viljoen@netronome.com \
--cc=simon.horman@netronome.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).