> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexander Duyck [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 5:19 PM
> To: KY Srinivasan <[email protected]>
> Cc: Rustad, Mark D <[email protected]>; David Miller
> <[email protected]>; netdev <[email protected]>; linux-
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Ronciak, John
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] intel: ixgbevf: Support Windows hosts
> (Hyper-V)
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 5:11 PM, KY Srinivasan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rustad, Mark D [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 5:07 PM
> >> To: KY Srinivasan <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: David Miller <[email protected]>; netdev
> >> <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> >> [email protected]; Ronciak, John <[email protected]>;
> intel-
> >> [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] intel: ixgbevf: Support Windows hosts
> >> (Hyper-V)
> >>
> >> KY Srinivasan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: Rustad, Mark D [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> >> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 4:01 PM
> >> >> To: KY Srinivasan <[email protected]>
> >> >> Cc: David Miller <[email protected]>; netdev
> >> >> <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> >> >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> >> >> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> >> >> [email protected]; Ronciak, John <[email protected]>;
> >> intel-
> >> >> [email protected]
> >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] intel: ixgbevf: Support Windows
> hosts
> >> >> (Hyper-V)
> >> >>
> >> >> Some comments below:
> >> >
> >> > Mark,
> >> >
> >> > Thank you for the comments. I will address them and repost the
> patches.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> >
> >> > K. Y
> >>
> >> Please look closely at Alex's comments. I think they are much more
> >> important.
> >
> > I am looking at Alex's comments as I am writing this.
> >
>
> On additional thought that just occurred to me after looking over the
> other patches you submitted for the hv_netvsc is that you might just
> stub out the multicast, unicast, and vfta configuration calls for the
> hyperV interface since all that stuff should be handled by the other
> link in the bond anyway. Then you should be able to mostly contain
> all the changes other than the device IDs to the vf.c file which is
> really how this kind of change should work anyway.
I will do that.
>
> Also I was wondering. Since HyperV is using a proprietary device ID
> anyway do you really need the calls like the one below?:
> + if (x86_hyper == &x86_hyper_ms_hyperv) {
>
> If we can just identify HyperV via the device Id then we could drop
> the x86 arch specific bits and instead just build for all cases.
Yes; I was planning to get rid of the x86 dependency. I will fix this.
K. Y
>
> - Alex
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
