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:	Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:54:17 -0700
From:	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
CC:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	dborkman <dborkman@...hat.com>, ogerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	jesse <jesse@...ira.com>, pshelar <pshelar@...ira.com>,
	azhou <azhou@...ira.com>, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, vyasevic <vyasevic@...hat.com>,
	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>,
	Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/4] introduce infrastructure for support
 of switch chip datapath

On 3/26/14, 3:54 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On 03/26/14 01:37, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
>> On 3/25/14, 1:11 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> 2014-03-25 12:35 GMT-07:00 Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>:
>
>> Sorry about getting on this thread late and possibly in the middle.
>> Agree on the idea of keeping the ports linked to the master switch dev
>> (or the 'conduit' to the switch chip) via private list instead of the
>> master-slave relationship proposed earlier.
>> By private i mean the netdev->priv linkage to the master switch dev and
>> not really keeping the ports from being exposed to the user.
>>
>> We think its better to keep the switch ports exposed as any other netdev
>> on linux.
>>   This approach will make the switch ports look exactly like a nic port
>> and all tools will continue to work seamlessly. The switch port
>> operations could internally be forwarded to the switch netdev (sw1 in
>> the above case).
>>
>> example:
>> $ip link set dev sw1p0 up
>> $ethtool -S sw1p0
>>
>
> I like the approach. I know the above is a simple version, but i am
> assuming you also mean i can do things like
> ip route add ...
> bridge fdb add ... (and if you like your brctl go ahead)
> bonding ...
>
yes, exactly.  We support this model on our boxes today.
User can bond switch ports on our box in the exact same way as he/she 
would bond two nic ports.
Our 'conduit to switch chip' reflects the corresponding lag 
configuration in the switch chip.
Same goes for bridging, routing, acls.

Thanks,
Roopa
--
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