From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2][RFC] virtio_net: MAC filtering Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:57:02 -0600 Message-ID: <4964FAFE.2040206@codemonkey.ws> References: <1231351559.7109.128.camel@lappy> <4964F11B.7020509@codemonkey.ws> <1231352906.7109.140.camel@lappy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rusty Russell , kvm , netdev , Mark McLoughlin To: Alex Williamson Return-path: Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.24]:35403 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753111AbZAGS5O (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:57:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1231352906.7109.140.camel@lappy> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Alex Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 12:14 -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> Alex Williamson wrote: >> >>> As noted in the RFC thread adding the kvm/qemu backing, this does >>> increase the size of the virtio-net device I/O port space, up to 1kB >>> with PCI rounding if we add a 4k entry VLAN bitmap. A 64 device limit >>> is still pretty high for a VM, but maybe we should think about adding >>> MMIO space for virtio-pci. Thanks, >>> >>> >> I'm not quite sure the best way to address this. Maybe another control >> queue for sending commands to control this sort of stuff? What are your >> thoughts Rusty? >> > > This is also a good time to decide if a fixed 16 entry MAC filter table > is sufficient. Should the size be programmed into the config space? > There's plenty of room to make it a bigger fixed size and still stay at > 1kB of I/O port space with the VLAN table. This implementation is a > little wasteful of space in using 8 bytes to store the MAC and a valid > bit, but I suspect there's some endian issues I'm ignoring and a > standard data type might make that easier later. > If we switch to a command queue, then there's no need to have any fixed limitation. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Alex > >