[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZOPZJ3J7T=i2QXQPr80Qb-V8RT3uPJaNFDnrOpYxJ1Mt_LNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:19:20 +0200
From: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To: Joseph Gasparakis <joseph.gasparakis@...el.com>
Cc: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
Yan Burman <yanb@...lanox.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: extending ndo_add_rx_vxlan_port
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Joseph Gasparakis
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2013, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Joseph Gasparakis wrote:
>> > VXLAN implementation is not done like VLAN. VLANs are stacked on top of
>> > real interfaces and what you are saying makes sense. VXLAN however is
>> > using ip[6]_tunnel_xmit, and this is why we need to notify all the
>>
>> As the name of the ndo you added ndo_add_rx_vxlan_port suggests -- HW
>> needs that for RX offloads. So basically, what I am saying is: in a
>> similar manner that we already program the NIC "over which" the vxlan
>> instance is set to listen on the multicast address which is associated
>> with that vxlan segement, lets give them a hint that packets arriving
>> on this group are vxlan ones, so they can use it for programming
>> steering rules.
>
> Why don't you write up some code so everyone has something to look at?
> Then we can see what makes sense to do in terms of the existing or new ndos.
sure, code talks, indeed, still, looking on net-next, for the current
ndo there's no in tree consumer unless I miss anything, did I?
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