On 1/5/2017 3:50 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:46 AM, Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudr...@intel.com> wrote:
On 1/3/2017 3:03 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudr...@intel.com> wrote:
On 12/30/2016 7:31 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:
Are you exposing switchdev ops for the representators? didn't see that
or maybe it's in the 4th patch which didn't make it to the list?
Not at this time. In the future patches when we offload fdb/vlan
functionality, we could use switchdev ops.
but wait, this is the switchdev mode... even before doing any
offloading, you want (need) your representor netdevices to have the
same HW ID marking they are all ports of the same ASIC, this you can
do with the switchdev parent ID attribute.
OK. I will add switchdev_port_attr_get() with PORT_PARENT_ID support in v3.
Good, I made this comment, b/c we want to create a well defined user-experience
to be taken into account also by upper virtualization layers.
Another piece there to add is have your VF reps implement the
get_phys_port_name ndo,
It looks like you are returning the VF port number as phys_port_name()
for a VF rep in en_rep.c.
Is this correct?
By default i am creating VFPR netdev with name as <pf_name>_VF<vf_num>
For ex; if enp5s0f0 is the pf name, VFPR netdev for VF0 will be enp5s0f0_vf0
If we want udev to follow this syntax should i return '_vf0' as
get_phys_port_name() for VF rep 0?
where as we explain in commit cb67b832921cfa20ad79bafdc51f1745339d0557 is used
as follows:
Port phys name (ndo_get_phys_port_name) is implemented to allow exporting
to user-space the VF vport number and along with the switchdev port parent
id (phys_switch_id) enable a udev base consistent naming scheme:
SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", ATTR{phys_switch_id}=="<phys_switch_id>",
\
ATTR{phys_port_name}!="", NAME="$PF_NIC$attr{phys_port_name}"
where phys_switch_id is exposed by the PF (and VF reps) and $PF_NIC is
the name of the PF netdevice.
Or.
