RE: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI ports

Parav Pandit
2019-03-18T19:44:27Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 2:37 PM
> To: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>; Samudrala, Sridhar
> <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>; davem@davemloft.net;
> netdev@vger.kernel.org; oss-drivers@netronome.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI
> ports
>
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 16:22:33 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> >>>>>>2. flavour should not be vf/pf, flavour should be hostport, switchport.
> >>> >Because switch is flat and agnostic of pf/vf/mdev.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Not sure. It's good to have this kind of visibility.
> >>>>>
> >>>> port can have label/attribute indicating that this belong to VF-1
> >>>> or mdev as long as you are agreeing to have mdev attribute on host
> port.
> >>>> (and not ask for abstracting it, because mdev is well defined kernel
> object).
> >>>
> >>> Why mdev cannot be another flavour?
> >>>
> >>
> >> hostport is of type pf/vf/mdev connected to some switchport.
> >>
> >> So proposal is to have,
> >> port flavour = hostport/switchport
> >> port type/label = pf/vf/mdev
> >>
> > Instead of having two attributes per port, how about having, port
> > flavour= physical/cpu/dsa/pf/vf/mdev/switchport.
> >
> > physical and pf has some overlapping definitions.
>
> What "overlapping definitions" do physical and PF have?
PF has physically user facing port.
And physical port in include/uapi/linux/devlink.h also describe that.