[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZOPZJdYvSYZ2O+h3nLM2dxjwRx6Ma975T7DZXVXUoZmywVeg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 23:29:33 +0300
From: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Narendra_K@...l.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, john.r.fastabend@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Add phys_port identifier to struct
net_device and export it to sysfs
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Ben Hutchings
<bhutchings@...arflare.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-07-21 at 14:14 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> Sorry, I missed that fact that initially you responded on this thread
>>
>> > The value could be anything. But note that you have to have different
>> > values for card1-port1,2 and card2-port1,2
>>
>> why?
>
> The intent is to identify physical ports uniquely, so userland can tell
> whether two devices are backed by the same physical port.
OK this makes sense, and I understand that there are also some SRIOV
aspects / use cases where this field could be usefu, still I don't
understamd the direct relation to virtual functions, as mentioned in
the 1st patch.
>
> But there's no requirement on the format, so you could ensure that one
> byte of this identifier is the port number on the board.
>
> Ben.
>
> --
> Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
> Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
> They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
>
--
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