From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Fastabend Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] l2 hardware accelerated macvlans Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 07:17:21 -0800 Message-ID: <52790C01.3070107@intel.com> References: <20131104185717.11802.69282.stgit@jf-dev1-dcblab> <5279051B.6000406@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nhorman@tuxdriver.com, alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, andy@greyhouse.net, davem@davemloft.net, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com To: Vlad Yasevich Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:11851 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750807Ab3KEPRn (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:17:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5279051B.6000406@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/5/2013 6:47 AM, Vlad Yasevich wrote: > Hi John > [...] >> series. It would be best (I think) to use the software >> path for macvlan to macvlan traffic and save the PCIe >> bus. Also this only allows for layer 2 mac forwarding >> where some hardware supports more interesting forwarding >> capabilities. Integrating with OVS may be useful here. > > This seems to be saying that for macvlan-macvlan > case, you still prefere to do software based forwarding, but > patch 1 in the series seem to always attempt to do hardware > offloaded forwarding regardless of traffic and macvlan type. > Can you clarify. > > Thanks > -vlad > This series always attempts to do hardware offload even in the macvlan-macvlan case as you note. I'm suggesting a further optimization might be to use the software based forwarding in this case. My plan is to investigate this after I get the initial series completed. .John