[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZOPZJBhDdQp2-8WG-UsToPHwyawYYVctqjZMT8JN85DK3XYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:11:28 +0300
From: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, roland@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
ali@...lanox.com, sean.hefty@...el.com, shlomop@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] net: Add support for virtual machine device queues (VMDQ)
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 1:05 AM, John Fastabend
<john.r.fastabend@...el.com> wrote:
> This adds support to allow virtual net devices to be created. These
> devices can be managed independently of the physical function but
> use the same physical link.
>
> This is analogous to an offloaded macvlan device. The primary
> advantage to VMDQ net devices over virtual functions is they can
> be added and removed dynamically as needed.
Hi John,
When VMDQ devices are opened over a virtual function which is
assigned to guest, the design should include a way to apply the
following ndo_set_vf_yyy calls to them
int (*ndo_set_vf_mac)(struct net_device *dev, int vf, u8* mac);
int (*ndo_set_vf_vlan)(struct net_device *dev, int vf, u16 vlan, u8 qos);
int (*ndo_set_vf_tx_rate)(struct net_device *dev, int vf, int rate);
int (*ndo_set_vf_spoofchk)(struct net_device *dev, int vf, bool setting);
Someone here suggested using a sub-index notation, that is m.n
represents vmdq device index = n on VF index = m where vf.0 is
the non vmdq VF device, makes sense? other thoughts?
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