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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 12:08:39 -0700 From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> 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, jhs@...atatu.com, sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, linville@...driver.com, dev@...nvswitch.org, jasowang@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, ryazanov.s.a@...il.com, buytenh@...tstofly.org, aviadr@...lanox.com, nbd@...nwrt.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, Neil.Jerram@...aswitch.com, ronye@...lanox.com Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 04/12] rtnl: expose physical switch id for particular device On 08/21/2014 09:18 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > The netdevice represents a port in a switch, it will expose > IFLA_PHYS_SWITCH_ID value via rtnl. Two netdevices with the same value > belong to one physical switch. > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> What is the relation between phys_port_id and phys_switch_id? phys_port_id was intended to identify a set of ports that belong to a single uplink port, eth0 eth1 eth2 eth3 (host facing) | | | | | | | | +---+-------+-------+------+---+ | embedded switch | +------------------------------+ | MAC (network) In the NIC case there is a simply switch with a port to the network which we currently don't represent with a netdev. Any netdev where the phys_switch_id's are behind the same embedded switch. In the switch id case we are indicating the port is attached to the same embedded switch as well. eth0 eth1 eth2 eth3 | | | | +----+----+----+----+----+ | switch | +----+----+----+----+----+ but they do not share an uplink port? So in this case each ethx has a unique phys_port_id but the same phys_switch_id? In the first case both phys_port_id and phys_switch_id should be equal for all interfaces correct? Is that clear/useful at all? We need to document this somewhere if/when the patches are submitted otherwise I doubt we will get it consistently right across drivers. There could for example be somewhat strange devices with virtual functions hanging off of the switch. Thanks, John -- John Fastabend Intel Corporation -- 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