netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 2/3] devlink: Consider other controller while building phys_port

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 26 Aug 2020 04:27:35 +0000
From:   Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>
CC:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "roid@...lanox.com" <roid@...lanox.com>,
        "saeedm@...lanox.com" <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 2/3] devlink: Consider other controller while
 building phys_port_name

Hi Jakub,

> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org <netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org>
> On Behalf Of Jakub Kicinski
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 6:02 AM
> 
> On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:58:38 +0300 Parav Pandit wrote:
> > A devlink port may be for a controller consist of PCI device.
> > A devlink instance holds ports of two types of controllers.
> > (1) controller discovered on same system where eswitch resides This is
> > the case where PCI PF/VF of a controller and devlink eswitch instance
> > both are located on a single system.
> > (2) controller located on other system.
> > This is the case where a controller is located in one system and its
> > devlink eswitch ports are located in a different system. In this case
> > devlink instance of the eswitch only have access to ports of the
> > controller.
> >
> > When a devlink eswitch instance serves the devlink ports of both
> > controllers together, PCI PF/VF numbers may overlap.
> > Due to this a unique phys_port_name cannot be constructed.
> 
> This description is clear as mud to me. Is it just me? Can someone understand
> this?

I would like to improve this description.
Do you have an input to describe these two different controllers, each has same PF and VF numbers?

$ devlink port show looks like below without a controller annotation.
pci/0000:00:08.0/0: type eth netdev eth5 flavour physical
pci/0000:00:08.0/1: type eth netdev eth6 flavour pcipf pfnum 0
pci/0000:00:08.0/2: type eth netdev eth7 flavour pcipf pfnum 0
                                                                                                   ^^^^^^^