Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 06:23:26PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 13:41:35 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 01:23:27PM CET, j...@resnulli.us wrote: >> >Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 07:24:30PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >> >>Current port flavours cover simple switches and DSA. Add PF >> >>and VF flavours to cover "switchdev" SR-IOV NICs. >> >> >> >>Example devlink user space output: >> >> >> >>$ devlink port >> >>pci/0000:82:00.0/0: type eth netdev p4p1 flavour physical >> >>pci/0000:82:00.0/10000: type eth netdev eth0 flavour pcie_pf pf 0 >> >>pci/0000:82:00.0/10001: type eth netdev eth1 flavour pcie_vf pf 0 vf 0 >> >>pci/0000:82:00.0/10002: type eth netdev eth2 flavour pcie_vf pf 0 vf 1 >> > >> >Wait a second, howcome pf and vfs have the same PCI address? >> >> Oh, I think you have these as eswitch port representors. Confusing... > >FWIW I don't like the word representor, its a port. We don't call >physical ports "representors" even though from ASIC's point of view >they are exactly the same.
My point is, they are not PFs and VFs. We have to find a way to clearly see what's what.
