On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 03:07:58PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 01:03:56PM CEST, [email protected] wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 06:46:14PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> >> That makes sense to me as it would be confusing to suddenly show unused
> >> port
> >> flavors after this patch series land. Andrew, Vladimir, does that work for
> >> you as well?
> >
> >I have nothing to object against somebody adding a '--all' argument to
> >devlink port commands.
>
> How "unused" is a "flavour"? It seems to me more like a separate
> attribute as port of any "flavour" may be potentially "unused". I don't
> think we should mix these 2.
Hi Jiri
Current flavours are:
enum devlink_port_flavour {
DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL, /* Any kind of a port physically
* facing the user.
*/
DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_CPU, /* CPU port */
DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_DSA, /* Distributed switch architecture
* interconnect port.
*/
DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PCI_PF, /* Represents eswitch port for
* the PCI PF. It is an internal
* port that faces the PCI PF.
*/
DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PCI_VF, /* Represents eswitch port
* for the PCI VF. It is an internal
* port that faces the PCI VF.
*/
DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_VIRTUAL, /* Any virtual port facing the user. */
};
A port in the DSA world is generally just a port on the switch. It is
not limited in nature. It can be used as a PHYSICAL, or CPU, or a DSA
port. We don't consider them as unused PHYISCAL ports, or unused CPU
ports. They are just unused ports. Which is why i added an UNUSED
flavour.
Now, it could be this world view is actually just a DSA world
view. Maybe some ASICs have strict roles for their ports? They are not
configurable? And then i could see it being an attribute? But that
messes up the DSA world view :-(
Andrew
