[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <541CAB9A.3040100@mojatatu.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 18:18:02 -0400
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
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, edumazet@...gle.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, simon.horman@...ronome.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 8/9] switchdev: introduce Netlink API
On 09/19/14 18:12, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 09/19/2014 10:57 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>> On 09/19/14 11:49, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 05:25:48PM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>>
>>>> Is this just a temporary test tool? Otherwise i dont see reason
>>>> for its existence (or the API that it feeds on).
>>>
>>> Please read the conversation I had with Pravin and Jesse in v1 thread.
>>> Long story short they like to have the api separated from ovs datapath
>>> so ovs daemon can use it to directly communicate with driver. Also John
>>> Fastabend requested a way to work with driver flows without using ovs ->
>>> that was the original reason I created switchdev genl api.
>>>
>>> Regarding the "sw" tool, yes it is for testing purposes now. ovs daemon
>>> will use directly switchdev genl api.
>>>
>>> I hope I cleared this out.
>>>
>>
>> It is - thanks Jiri.
>>
>> cheers,
>> jamal
>
> Hi Jiri,
>
> I was considering a slightly different approach where the
> device would report via netlink the fields/actions it
> supported rather than creating pre-defined enums for every
> possible key.
>
> I already need to have an API to report fields/matches
> that are being supported why not have the device report
> the headers as header fields (len, offset) and the
> associated parse graph the hardware uses? Vendors should
> have this already to describe/design their real hardware.
>
> As always its better to have code and when I get some
> time I'll try to write it up. Maybe its just a separate
> classifier although I don't actually want two hardware
> flow APIs.
>
> I see you dropped the RFC tag are you proposing we include
> this now?
>
Actually I just realized i missed something very basic that
Jiri said. I think i understand the tool being there for testing
but i am assumed the same about the genlink api.
Jiri, are you saying that genlink api is there to
stay?
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