On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Jiri Pirko <[email protected]> wrote: > Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:40:31AM CEST, [email protected] wrote: >>On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Simon Horman >><[email protected]> wrote: >>> Teach rocker to forward packets to CPU when a port is joined to Open >>> vSwitch. >>> There is scope to later refine what is passed up as per Open vSwitch flows >>> on a port. >>> >>> This does not change the behaviour of rocker ports that are >>> not joined to Open vSwitch. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]> >> >>Acked-by: Scott Feldman <[email protected]> >> >>Now, OVS flows on a port. Strange enough, that was the first RFC >>implementation for switchdev/rocker where we hooked into ovs-kernel >>module and programmed flows into hw. We pulled all of that code >>because, IIRC, the ovs folks didn't want us hooking into the kernel >>module directly. We dropped the ovs hooks and focused on hooking >>kernel's L2/L3. The device (rocker) didn't really change: OF-DPA >>pipeline was used for both. Might be interesting to try hooking it >>again. > > > I think that now we have an infrastructure prepared for that. I mean, > what we need to do is to introduce another generic switchdev object > called "ntupleflow" and hook-up again into ovs datapath and cls_flower > and insert/remove the object from those codes. Should be pretty easy to do.
That sounds right. Is the ovs datapath hooking still happening in the ovs-kernel module? Remind me again, what was the objection the last time we tried that? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
