[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53F73A9C.4000209@mojatatu.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 08:42:04 -0400
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
CC: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>, tgraf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
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>,
Jeff Kirsher <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>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
dev <dev@...nvswitch.org>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>,
Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>,
Aviad Raveh <aviadr@...lanox.com>,
Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Neil Jerram <Neil.Jerram@...aswitch.com>, ronye@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 03/12] net: introduce generic switch devices
support
On 08/21/14 13:05, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 2014-08-21 9:18 GMT-07:00 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>:
>> The goal of this is to provide a possibility to suport various switch
>> chips. Drivers should implement relevant ndos to do so. Now there is a
>> couple of ndos defines:
>> - for getting physical switch id is in place.
>> - for work with flows.
>>
>> Note that user can use random port netdevice to access the switch.
>
> I read through this patch set, and I still think that DSA is the
> generic switch infrastructure we already have because it does provide
> the following:
>
> - taking a generic platform data structure (C struct or Device Tree),
> validate, parse it and map it to internal kernel structures
> - instantiate per-port network devices based on the configuration data provided
> - delegate netdev_ops to the switch driver and/or the CPU NIC when relevant
> - provide support for hooking RX and TX traffic coming from the CPU NIC
>
> I would rather we build on the existing DSA infrastructure and add the
> flow-related netdev_ops rather than having the two remain in
> disconnect while flow-oriented switches driver get progressively
> added. I guess I should take a closer look at the rocker driver to see
> how hard would that be for you.
>
> What do you think?
I thought we had concluded that DSA was a good path forward? Or maybe
at this stage we need to have several alternative approaches
and we eventually converge?
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists