Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 07:04:46PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >Hi! > >This series is a long overdue follow up to Jiri's work on providing >a common .ndo_phys_port_name implementation based on devlink ports. > >First devlink port flavours for PF and VF ports are added, and >registered by the NFP. Port numbers and split info are reserved >for physical and DSA ports. For PCIe ports we add pf/vf identifiers. >Note that devices may have more than one PF, including multi host >scenarios where not all pfs are connected to the same host. > >The port_index is slightly tricky to figure out, we use a bit of >math to create unique IDs for ports. > >Next subports for PCIe ports are introduced. This is in case device >has more than one netdev on a physical function (e.g. multi port >SmartNIC). > >With the above features in place we can remove the ndo_phys_port_name >implementation from the NFP and use the standard devlink one for >port netdevs. > >Last but not least a concept of peer netdevs is added. In multi-host >scenarios its currently not possible to figure out which PF is >associated with the local host. Peer device is "the other side >of the wire" for PCIe ports. In case of NFP we only link the PF >netdevs, but it should be possible to also link VF peers after >VF driver probes, if users request it. > >This is the conceptual image of devlink instances: > > HOST A || HOST B > || > PF A | V | V | V | V || PF B | V | V | V > |*F |*F |*F |*F ... || |*F |*F |*F >*port A0 |*port A1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 ||*port B0 |*port B1 | 0 | 1 | 2 > || > PCI Express link || PCI Express link > \ \ \ | | | | | / / / > \ \ \ | | | | | / / / > /\ \______\______\'___|___|__________|_______'____/___/___/__ /\ > || |+PF0s0|+PF0s1 |+VF0|+VF1| ...| |+PF1s0|+PF1s1|+VF0|+VF1| || > i || |------ ------ ----- ---- ----|--- ------ ------ ---- ----| || i >d n H || | <<========== | || d n >H >e s O || | ==========>> | || e s >O >v t S || | SR-IOV e-switch | || v t >S >l a T || | <<========== | || l a >T >i n || | ==========>> | || i n >n c A || | ________ _________ ________ | || n c >B >k e || | |+Phys 0 |+Phys 1 |+Phys 2 | | || k e > || \---------------------------------------------------------/ || > \/ | | | \/ > | | | > || || > MAC 0 || MAC 1 || MAC 2 > || || > > '+' marks the devlink ports and port (-representor-) netdevs > '*' marks host netdevs (actual VF/PF netdev)
As I wrote in the reply to patch 4, I think we need to figure out if we want to model all entities that belong under specific devlink instance/pci address - which I prefer, or we want to have only eswitch ports there. One way or another, I think that it is not good idea to merge this patchset this late, I would prefer to wait for next net-next opening... In the meantime we can sync and make this whole thing crystal clear, for everyone. Thanks!
