On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:48:16 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 06:56:38PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: > >On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 13:20:37 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >For creating subdevices, I don't think the handle should ever be port. > >We create new ports on a devlink instance, and configure its forwarding > > Okay I agree. Something like: > $ devlink port add pci/0000:00:10.0 ..... > > It's a bit confusing because "set" accepts port handle (like > pci/0000:00:10.0/1). Probably better would be: > $ devlink dev port add pci/0000:00:10.0 ..... > > >with offloads of well established Linux SW constructs. New devices are > >not logically associated with other ports (see how in my patches there > >are 2 "subports" but no main port on that PF - a split not a hierarchy). > > Right, basically you have 2 equal objects. Makes sense. > > >How we want to model forwarding inside a VM (who configures the > >underlying switching) remains unclear. > > I don't understand. Could you elaborate a bit?
If VF in a VM gets a partitioning request does the new port pop up on the hypervisor? With a port netdev? Does the VF also create a port object as well as host port object? That question is probably independent of host port discussion.
