netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/4] introduce infrastructure for support of switch chip datapath

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:40:21 +0100
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, nhorman@...driver.com,
	andy@...yhouse.net, tgraf@...g.ch, dborkman@...hat.com,
	ogerlitz@...lanox.com, jesse@...ira.com, pshelar@...ira.com,
	azhou@...ira.com, ben@...adent.org.uk, stephen@...workplumber.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/4] introduce infrastructure for support of
 switch chip datapath

Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:49:07PM CET, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>Hi Jiri,
>
>On 03/19/14 11:33, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>This is just an early draft, RFC. I wanted to post this early to get the
>>feedback as soon as possible.
>>
>>The basic idea is to introduce a generic infractructure to support various
>>switch chips in kernel. Also the idea is to benefit of currently existing
>>Open vSwitch userspace infrastructure.
>>
>
>
>I think the abstraction should be a netdev and to be specific the
>bridge - not openvswitch. Our current tools like ifconfig, iproute2,
>bridge etc should continue to work.

That is exactly the case. Nothing is specific to OVS. OVS is just a one
method to access the switchdev api.

Abstraction is netdev. One netdev per each switch port and one netdev as
a master on the top of that representing the switch itself.


>In my experience, it is sufficient to model a switch after the linux
>bridge at the basic level if the starting point is
>L2 (which is the lowest common denominator).
>And then you add capabilities that different chips expose.
>Not every chip can do vxlan, flows etc. And we already know how
>to abstract those out.
>My  experience on top of broadcom chips is the approach i described
>works rather well.
>
>Additionally, note:
>We do have L2 devices that offload in the kernel
>(refer to DSA, posting earlier from the openwrt guys, and
>the intel devices which do VDMQ etc). I am now counting we have 5
>different approaches if we add yours.

I think that the problem is that each solution serves different purpose.
For example DSA is for switches connected as a PHY to a MAC. That is
completely different case to what my switchdev API is trying to handle.


>
>cheers,
>jamal
>--
>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
--
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