From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine•com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli•us>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft•net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel•org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat•com>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom•com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse•net>,
Gal Pressman <gal@nvidia•com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeed@kernel•org>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel•com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel•com>,
Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@gmail•com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp•com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn•ch>, Fei Qin <fei.qin@corigine•com>,
netdev@vger•kernel.org, oss-drivers@corigine•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC net-next 1/2] devlink: expose port function commands to assign VFs to multiple netdevs
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 13:37:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y+OXcvsylX8AzNg8@corigine.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+OWy0prxf5pNWpv@nanopsycho>
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 01:34:19PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 01:07:54PM CET, simon.horman@corigine•com wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 12:40:45PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 04:36:02PM CET, simon.horman@corigine•com wrote:
> >> >From: Fei Qin <fei.qin@corigine•com>
> >> >
> >> >Multiple physical ports of the same NIC may share the single
> >> >PCI address. In some cases, assigning VFs to different physical
> >> >ports can be demanded, especially under high-traffic scenario.
> >> >Load balancing can be realized in virtualised use¬cases through
> >> >distributing packets between different physical ports with LAGs
> >> >of VFs which are assigned to those physical ports.
> >> >
> >> >This patch adds new attribute "vf_count" to 'devlink port function'
> >> >API which only can be shown and configured under devlink ports
> >> >with flavor "DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL".
> >>
> >> I have to be missing something. That is the meaning of "assigning VF"
> >> to a physical port? Why there should be any relationship between
> >> physical port and VF other than configured forwarding (using TC for
> >> example)?
> >>
> >> This seems very wrong. Preliminary NAK.
> >
> >Of course if TC is involved, then we have flexibility.
> >
> >What we are talking about here is primarily legacy mode.
>
> I don't see any reason to add knobs for purpose of supporting the legacy
> mode, sorry.
>
> If you need this functionality, use TC.
I understand your point, even if I don't agree in this case.
> >And the behaviour described would, when enabled allow NFP based NICs
> >to behave more like most other multi-port NICs.
> >
> >That is, we can envisage a VEB with some VFs and one physical port.
> >And anther with other VFs and another physical port.
> >
> >This is as opposed to a single VEB with all VFs, as is currently
> >the case on NFP based NICs (but not most other multi-port NICs).
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-08 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-06 15:36 [PATCH/RFC net-next 0/2] devlink: expose port function commands to assign VFs to multiple devlink Simon Horman
2023-02-06 15:36 ` [PATCH/RFC net-next 1/2] devlink: expose port function commands to assign VFs to multiple netdevs Simon Horman
2023-02-07 2:42 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-02-08 10:38 ` Simon Horman
2023-02-08 11:21 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-02-08 11:36 ` Simon Horman
2023-02-08 11:41 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-02-08 12:09 ` Simon Horman
2023-02-08 11:53 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-02-08 12:05 ` Simon Horman
2023-02-08 21:37 ` Saeed Mahameed
2023-02-08 23:35 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-02-09 0:55 ` Saeed Mahameed
2023-02-09 2:20 ` Yinjun Zhang
2023-02-09 15:15 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-02-10 2:14 ` Yinjun Zhang
2023-02-10 3:30 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-02-10 9:45 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-02-08 11:40 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-02-08 12:07 ` Simon Horman
2023-02-08 12:34 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-02-08 12:37 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2023-02-08 23:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-02-06 15:36 ` [PATCH/RFC net-next 2/2] nfp: add support for assigning VFs to different physical ports Simon Horman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y+OXcvsylX8AzNg8@corigine.com \
--to=simon.horman@corigine$(echo .)com \
--cc=andrew@lunn$(echo .)ch \
--cc=andy@greyhouse$(echo .)net \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=ecree.xilinx@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=fei.qin@corigine$(echo .)com \
--cc=gal@nvidia$(echo .)com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli$(echo .)us \
--cc=kuba@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=michael.chan@broadcom$(echo .)com \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=oss-drivers@corigine$(echo .)com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=saeed@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox