[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100422210342.GC30693@x200.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 14:03:42 -0700
From: Chris Wright <chrisw@...hat.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@...hat.com>,
Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Mitch Williams <mitch.a.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next,1/2] add iovnl netlink support
* Arnd Bergmann (arnd@...db.de) wrote:
> On Thursday 22 April 2010 21:02:30 Chris Wright wrote:
> > * Arnd Bergmann (arnd@...db.de) wrote:
> > > On Thursday 22 April 2010 19:47:29 Chris Wright wrote:
> > > > OK, wasn't clear if you meant that or simply 100% dedicating the interface
> > > > via something like virtio. The add_vf() idea, while neat, doesn't really
> > > > match how VF's are allocated.
> > >
> > > But we still need something like that for allocating queues in VMDq
> > > and similar cases where we do not have pass-through, right?
> >
> > Iff we care about VMDq w/out SR-IOV (since SR-IOV hardware is VMDq
> > capable and already has a queue-pair + interrupt + net_dev), yes.
> >
> > And it's not just VMDq, it's any multi-queue card that can do mac/vlan
> > filter in hw + header/data split (for direct data DMA to guest buffers).
>
> Right, that's what I meant by VMDq. Do we have a better term to describe
> this class of devices, i.e. VMDq and other cards that also have the
> features you listed?
I don't have a good term. Some of these devices can already surface
multiple netdevs.
thanks,
-chris
--
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