From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@amd.com>
Cc: brett.creeley@amd.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, drivers@pensando.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 0/2] pds_core: add switchdev and tc for vlan offload
Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 14:14:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230504141430.5eafa505@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ad5bf0ee-9d93-e0c0-cb22-7b572b75d6a2@amd.com>
On Thu, 4 May 2023 13:51:13 -0700 Shannon Nelson wrote:
> On 5/3/23 6:27 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > You mean setting vlan encap via devlink?
> > I don't know why you'd do that. It will certainly aggravate me,
> > and I doubt anyone will care/support you.
>
> We're trying to solve what would seem to be a simple problem for our
> customer: how to do basic vlan encap/decap on all traffic going in and
> of a VF.
Offload bridge.
If your customer doesn't want the bridge offload you can decide
to ship an out of tree driver for them with whatever deprecated
APIs you please.
> With no host PF traffic, the legacy ip-link and the newer
> switchdev+tc solutions don't fit. As this is VF port setup, and devlink
> is meant for device setup, it would seem to fit in the devlink port
> function model similar to the setting of the port hw_addr. What am I
> missing that makes this an unacceptable answer?
>
> I understand you don't like this devlink port function suggestion, but
> when I go back to negotiate with internal management, architects, etc, I
> can get a lot further with them if I have a technical explanation of why
> this is not acceptable. So, at the risk of further aggravating you, can
> I request a little more detail on why this is a bad idea?
The direction of the community was to use offload of standard networking
concepts like switching, routing and flow matching for probably a decade
now.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-04 21:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-27 16:45 [PATCH RFC net-next 0/2] pds_core: add switchdev and tc for vlan offload Shannon Nelson
2023-04-27 16:45 ` [PATCH RFC net-next 1/2] pds_core: netdev representors for each VF Shannon Nelson
2023-04-27 16:45 ` [PATCH RFC net-next 2/2] pds_core: tc command handling for vlan push-pop Shannon Nelson
2023-04-28 22:52 ` [PATCH RFC net-next 0/2] pds_core: add switchdev and tc for vlan offload Samudrala, Sridhar
2023-05-02 20:59 ` Shannon Nelson
2023-05-02 23:43 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-05-03 22:49 ` Shannon Nelson
2023-05-04 1:27 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-05-04 20:51 ` Shannon Nelson
2023-05-04 21:14 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
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=20230504141430.5eafa505@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=brett.creeley@amd.com \
--cc=drivers@pensando.io \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shannon.nelson@amd.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).