Date:	Sat, 23 Aug 2014 11:17:26 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	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

Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 03:02:10AM CEST, f.fainelli@...il.com wrote:
>2014-08-22 5:56 GMT-07:00 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>:
>> Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 02:42:04PM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>>>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?
>>
>> That is true. I'm still unsure how to fit this on to DSA or how to change DSA
>> the way this fits. This is my quest now. Will report back in a week or so.
>
>I don't want to hold off this patch series, so let's proceed with your
>submission, since I believe John Fastabend would also directly benefit
>from this.
>
>In the meantime, I will keep working on DSA, and prototype changes
>with the rocker driver.
>
>Once we are confident we have bridged the gap, we can unify things.
>How does that sound?

Sounds good. 
--
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