From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: extending ndo_add_rx_vxlan_port Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:19:20 +0200 Message-ID: References: <526D2F8F.1070204@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Or Gerlitz , John Fastabend , Yan Burman , netdev , Stephen Hemminger To: Joseph Gasparakis Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:53718 "EHLO mail-pb0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756032Ab3J1STV (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:19:21 -0400 Received: by mail-pb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id um1so2601949pbc.28 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 11:19:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Joseph Gasparakis > On Mon, 28 Oct 2013, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Joseph Gasparakis wrote: >> > VXLAN implementation is not done like VLAN. VLANs are stacked on top of >> > real interfaces and what you are saying makes sense. VXLAN however is >> > using ip[6]_tunnel_xmit, and this is why we need to notify all the >> >> As the name of the ndo you added ndo_add_rx_vxlan_port suggests -- HW >> needs that for RX offloads. So basically, what I am saying is: in a >> similar manner that we already program the NIC "over which" the vxlan >> instance is set to listen on the multicast address which is associated >> with that vxlan segement, lets give them a hint that packets arriving >> on this group are vxlan ones, so they can use it for programming >> steering rules. > > Why don't you write up some code so everyone has something to look at? > Then we can see what makes sense to do in terms of the existing or new ndos. sure, code talks, indeed, still, looking on net-next, for the current ndo there's no in tree consumer unless I miss anything, did I? Or.