netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: phy: b53: switchdev driver for Broadcom BCM53xx switches

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]

Message-ID: <CACna6rx6ogLhPEm8yLSCHd-K3S3kbN+XExc_-y-hFieWsB34DQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Feb 2015 18:23:54 +0100
From:	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
	Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: b53: switchdev driver for Broadcom BCM53xx switches

On 25 February 2015 at 16:46, Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 03:03:56PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> What we don't want is X chip families and Y different ways to
>> configure the features. Ideal we want X chip families, and one way to
>> configure them all.
>
> This statement is really my primary concern.  There is lots of interest
> around hardware offload at this point and it seems like there is a risk
> that a lack of consistency can create problems.
>
> I think these patches are great as they allow for the programming of the
> offload hardware (and it has been pointed out that this drastically
> increases performance), but one concern I have with this patch (related
> to this) is that I'm not sure there is a major need to create netdevs
> automatically if there is not the ability to rx/tx actual frames on
> these interfaces.
>
> Since the SoC's NIC is going to handle all packet rx/tx then it seems
> like there should be a way to signal between the switching
> hardware/driver and the NIC driver.  I'm not sure what the ideal
> interface for this is, but maybe there is room in the switchdev infra
> add some ops to find a way to make this signalling possible to create
> netdevs and allow incoming traffic to be assigned to the appropriate
> device.

This is what we have in OpenWrt currently and what Florian was trying
to upstream last time. Please try to see
[PATCH 0/4 net-next] net: phy: add Generic Netlink switch configuration API
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/288039
, but be aware it's not a short discussion.

One of the reason for rejecting this patchset was that architecture
wasn't using net devices. So exactly something opposite you tried
suggesting now ;)

-- 
Rafał
--
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