From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Fastabend Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: Offloading bonds to hardware Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:51:28 -0800 Message-ID: <56481D60.10209@gmail.com> References: <77EF4405DD4BB54AACCE7DB593DF6A9A9FD653@SJEXCHMB14.corp.ad.broadcom.com> <20151114093920.GA2188@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , andrew@lunn.ch, f.fainelli@gmail.com, idosch@mellanox.com, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, sfeldma@gmail.com, gospo@cumulusnetworks.com, davem@davemloft.net To: Jiri Pirko , Premkumar Jonnala Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:33095 "EHLO mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750929AbbKOFvt (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Nov 2015 00:51:49 -0500 Received: by pabfh17 with SMTP id fh17so142097801pab.0 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 21:51:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20151114093920.GA2188@nanopsycho.orion> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 15-11-14 01:39 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 05:02:18PM CET, pjonnala@broadcom.com wrote: >> Packet forwarding to/from bond interfaces is done in software. >> >> This patch enables certain platforms to bridge traffic to/from >> bond interfaces in hardware. Notifications are sent out when >> the "active" slave set for a bond interface is updated in >> software. Platforms use the notifications to program the >> hardware accordingly. The changes have been verified to work >> with configured and 802.3ad bond interfaces. >> >> Signed-off-by: Premkumar Jonnala > > This patch is wrong, in many different acpects. Leaving the submission > style, and no in-tree consumer aside, adding ndos for this thing is > unacceptable. It should be handled as a part of switchdev attrs. Why is it unacceptable? I think its at least worth debating. If I have a nic that can do bonding but none of the other switchdev things then implementing another ndo is certainly more straight forward. As it is heading many of the 10+Gbps nics may need to implement just enough of the switchdev infrastructure to get things like bonding up and working. Not necessarily a bad thing if we make the switchdev infrastructure light but does sort of make the name confusing if my nic is not doing any switching ;) Thanks, John > Also, the solution should not be bonding-centric. > > I have a patchset in my queue which does this correctly, for bond and team > using switchdev attr and with actual in-tree consumer, mlxsw driver. > I plan to send that soon after net-next opens. > > Jiri > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >