[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <356be994-7cf9-e7b2-8992-46a70bc6a54b@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 10:31:59 +0800
From: tanhuazhong <tanhuazhong@...wei.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<salil.mehta@...wei.com>, <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
<linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 0/2] net: hns3: adds two VLAN feature
On 2020/5/22 17:35, tanhuazhong wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/5/22 5:37, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>> Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 12:17:07 -0700
>>
>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 19:38:23 +0800 Huazhong Tan wrote:
>>>> This patchset adds two new VLAN feature.
>>>>
>>>> [patch 1] adds a new dynamic VLAN mode.
>>>> [patch 2] adds support for 'QoS' field to PVID.
>>>>
>>>> Change log:
>>>> V1->V2: modifies [patch 1]'s commit log, suggested by Jakub Kicinski.
>>>
>>> I don't like the idea that FW is choosing the driver behavior in a way
>>> that's not observable via standard Linux APIs. This is the second time
>>> a feature like that posted for a driver this week, and we should
>>> discourage it.
>>
>> Agreed, this is an unacceptable approach to driver features.
>>
>
> Hi, Jakub & David.
>
> As decribed in patch #1, there is a scenario which needs the dynamic
> mode(port VLAN filter is always disabled, andVF VLAN filter is keep
> disable until a non-zero VLAN ID being used for the function).
>
> Is this mode selection provided through "ethtool --set-priv-flags"
> more acceptable? Or is there any other better suggestion for this?
>
> Thanks.
>
Hi, Jakub & David.
For patch#1, is it acceptable adding "ethtool --get-priv-flags"
to query the VLAN. If yes, I will send a RFC for it.
Best Regards.
Thanks.
>> .
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists