From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joseph Gasparakis Subject: Re: extending ndo_add_rx_vxlan_port Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:24:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <526D2F8F.1070204@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Joseph Gasparakis , Or Gerlitz , John Fastabend , Yan Burman , netdev , Stephen Hemminger To: Or Gerlitz Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:23905 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755988Ab3J1UHi (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:07:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 28 Oct 2013, Or Gerlitz wrote: > 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. > I don't think you missed anything. My patches for the i40e are currently in our trees and making their way to netdev. It will be very soon.