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 17:51:22 -0400
From:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
CC:	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, 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 03/26/14 14:14, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 06:58:32PM CET, f.fainelli@...il.com wrote:
>> 2014-03-26 10:35 GMT-07:00 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>:


>> You are right, sw1p0 and sw1p1 were meant to be, say LAN ports in my example.
>>
>> I think there is an implicit convention that sw1 represents the
>> Ethernet switch port connected to the CPU Ethernet MAC, and that it is
>> always connected, hence there is no need to create a "fake" bridge to
>> link sw1 to eth0 for instance?
>
> I think you are kind of mixing apples and oranges (or I might be I'm not
> understanding you correctly).
> This is how I see it, sticking to the names you use in the example:
>
>              (sw1) (abstract place-holder netdev)
>            --------
>           switch chip                   CPU
>     -----------------------            ------
>     sw1p0 sw1p1 sw1p2 sw1p3             eth0
>       |     |     |     |                |
>      PHY   PHY   PHY    ------someMII-----
>
> You see that eth0 is the CPU part of the "connection" and sw1p3 is the
> switch part (port representation).
>


Florian - I am sure you explained this before; I just dont remember. Why
is there need to expose eth0? It seems to me sw1p0-3 are abstracted
already in the kernel and the "cpu port" is merely a control interface.

Note: even the high end chips tend to have the concept of a "cpu port"
but my experience is to hide that as part of the switch driver.

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