On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 17:08:15 +0000 Parav Pandit wrote: > > From: Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> > > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 10:22 PM > > > > On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 20:20:12 +0300 Parav Pandit wrote: > > > Hi Dave, Jakub, > > > > > > Similar to PCI VF, PCI SF represents portion of the device. > > > PCI SF is represented using a new devlink port flavour. > > > > > > This short series implements small part of the RFC described in detail at > > > [1] > > and [2]. > > > > > > It extends > > > (a) devlink core to expose new devlink port flavour 'pcisf'. > > > (b) Expose new user interface to add/delete devlink port. > > > (c) Extends netdevsim driver to simulate PCI PF and SF ports > > > (d) Add port function state attribute > > > > Is this an RFC? It doesn't add any in-tree users. > It is not an RFC. > devlink + mlx5 + netdevsim is crossing 25+ patches on eswitch side. > So splitting it to logical piece as devlink + netdevsim. > After which mlx5 eswitch side come close to 15 + 4 patches which can > run as two separate patchset. > > What do you suggest?
Start with real patches, not netdevsim.
