From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DAD7237177; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739197173; cv=none; b=CY9btvKls66d+wfq44kAY6li3re/VSyxK1z0BUIySBHywLDz2bIjfIDonf3+JsVgklmhwv386jXoxTuQCUsngkUqEp0oU1BigpVkitfXIh5w4AGTOi7R0d2B18MW3gc8xi7FZrJ30ZgVVKIdFPQ7AmHHvSSf5Cq/qHDIuYDYobw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739197173; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tc4eeJ6oXgsOFuV3/HtEN1P7ANINGxbJ8KhoSu06eTI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=h06gzoyjnrrs6kxmfZVMFBW3by7GOV9cy9L2UeWFu3abHf52P/OKAkHiLCwF1n5w1XeydiUej63KcQEEpZu6pb/Il40tN5Wd2DpLIgLx5OBGJp7a+oCcTgXKvWioaG3xGHUO1lMSXZEzPojYbhTBwkPKLv11risHkgxd1+Mp0ks= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=rmrzRNvo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="rmrzRNvo" Received: from pps.filterd (m0356517.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 51AC7mLU016074; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:26 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=Tv4nL2 2TJCpg9Kk+KxUkvQiLf6XNSk6aI0GzIp72GAU=; b=rmrzRNvoKd6Wi2dKcFoB/L BnYOj+M6lVhd84cNG8TkKVamiUFKuB1LUHjVtHqCeuWX060JI37eE/V3+zS0VFKx ZR4iBHAzHdbe127qZdYpQIiRldDJrd2sR7b2ycTM7vpwRqLK9NcB7yHihmEtpDoF fSPGk2WhQPAWDZUFyFhkEZFsko1c+rvyrnzAqhrLCJFffiRVqYRjiddfMWPteZdz x+qQ8TPnBl6zqtDrDEvgot9aSj/IXGYTYxZvxonQyqc7T/7lTujVLmmTLF/69XDZ v7D/n85OJ+QjCzWU6fruu4C2qmp2aFP5dsIYkmm3krgVoKxQdH7v5OjUGwxrPcfQ == Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 44q5gabq04-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from m0356517.ppops.net (m0356517.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.18.0.8/8.18.0.8) with ESMTP id 51AED2YQ026980; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:25 GMT Received: from ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5d.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.93]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 44q5gabpyy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 51ACK4Iv016743; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:24 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.228]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 44pk3jxm1r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:24 +0000 Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.105]) by smtprelay04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 51AEJKFD28574344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:20 GMT Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 111FF2013F; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE04C2013B; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-ce58cfcc-320b-11b2-a85c-85e19b5285e0 (unknown [9.171.22.27]) by smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with SMTP; Mon, 10 Feb 2025 14:19:18 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:19:17 +0100 From: Halil Pasic To: Guangguan Wang Cc: Paolo Abeni , wenjia@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com, alibuda@linux.alibaba.com, tonylu@linux.alibaba.com, guwen@linux.alibaba.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, horms@kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexandra Winter , Halil Pasic Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net/smc: use the correct ndev to find pnetid by pnetid table Message-ID: <20250210151917.394e8567.pasic@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <3dc68650-904c-4a1d-adc4-172e771f640c@linux.alibaba.com> References: <20241227040455.91854-1-guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com> <1f4a721f-fa23-4f1d-97a9-1b27bdcd1e21@redhat.com> <20250107203218.5787acb4.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <908be351-b4f8-4c25-9171-4f033e11ffc4@linux.alibaba.com> <20250109040429.350fdd60.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20250114130747.77a56d9a.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <3dc68650-904c-4a1d-adc4-172e771f640c@linux.alibaba.com> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: yCIZ2RZbueuUY42KIuKe0GPL3TjLKFnv X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: cLrpU6az_SIFJpqqb_HRqbnlL0GKtwWA X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1057,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.68.34 definitions=2025-02-10_08,2025-02-10_01,2024-11-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=957 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2501170000 definitions=main-2502100117 On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:53:15 +0800 Guangguan Wang wrote: > > Imagine the following you have your nice little setup with a PNETID on > > a non-leaf and a base_ndev that has no PNETID. Then your HW admin > > configures a PNETID to your base_ndev, a different one. Suddenly > > your ndev PNETID is ignored for reasons not obvious to you. Yes it is > > similar to having a software PNETID on the base_ndev and getting it > > overruled by a HW PNETID, but much less obvious IMHO. I am wondering if there are any scenarios that require setting different > pnetids for different net devices in one netdev hierarchy. If no, maybe > we should limit that only one pnetid can be set to one netdev hierarchy. I wonder what topologies and changes to topologies are possible. If changes to a topology are possible then making sure there is only one PNETID within a netdev hierarchy can be difficult, as we would need to prevent changing the topology if a device has a not PNETID. (E.g. we first set a pnetid when the netdev is still not in a hierarchy and then try to put it into the hierarchy that already has a different PNETID within). Regarding allowable topologies, using your ASCII-art. I think you could add 2 Pods with an IPVLAN eth0 (Pod) on top of eth1 (host) each. Those would be in a single hierarchy I guess, but I guess you would still want to be able to set (most likely the same) PNETID on each. Bottom line is, this approach looks tricky to me. Maybe with a crisper explanation on what are these upper-lower links for. Maybe I am overgeneralizing here. Regards, Halil