[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <15ddcffd1002152253g2426f3e9l33cdc6b862d7734c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:53:47 +0200
From: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To: Yevgeny Petrilin <yevgenyp@...lanox.co.il>
Cc: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
tziporet@...lanox.co.il, liranl@...lanox.co.il,
Alex Rosenbaum <alexr@...taire.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 18/23 v3] mlx4_core: Managing common port filters by
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Yevgeny Petrilin
<yevgenyp@...lanox.co.il> wrote:
> On Sunday -10,January,-28163 09:59 PM, Or Gerlitz [or.gerlitz@...il.com] wrote:
> The multicast bloom filter is a false-positive filter per port.
> All multicast packets go through the Multicast tables mechanism where every PF/VF is registered for every multicast address
okay, so the bloom filter is going and exact match is coming, understood.
>> As for the false-positive vlan filter, I understand that this means further filtering has to be applied by some driver. Where you
>> thinking on the 802q driver? what about the case where a VF driver is assigned a vlan, does the mlx4 VF code does filtering?
> The deal with the VLAN filter is similar, it includes all VIDs that some PF/VF requested.
So for a given VID, a unicast packet carrying it will be dispatched to
all the PFs/VFs which
have registered this VID? I guess this isn't the case, so please elaborate.
> We plan to add a MAC+VLAN filter implementation, that would cancel the need in this filter.
I'm still not clear in what level you expect the software filtering to happen
Or.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists