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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20150225080751.GC2039@nanopsycho.orion> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:07:51 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com> Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.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> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: b53: switchdev driver for Broadcom BCM53xx switches Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:03:48AM CET, zajec5@...il.com wrote: >On 25 February 2015 at 01:39, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote: >> On 24/02/15 16:15, Andrew Lunn wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 02:55:58PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: >>>> On 24/02/15 14:50, Rafa?? Mi??ecki wrote: >>>>> As said in the commit message, these switches are really simple >>>>> devices. We can't actually send packets to the particular ports >>>>> (unless something has changed in the more recent hardware). >>>> >>>> These switches all support Broadcom tags, so you could use your host CPU >>>> Ethernet MAC to send/receive packets to/from specific ports of the >>>> switch, and then this is just like DSA, but everything that you say >>>> below is true. >>> >>> If this hardware does support the concept of tags compatible to the >>> existing Broadcom Starfighter 2, should we not do that? Is there a >>> good reason these chips should use a difference abstraction than >>> Starfighter 2 and the Marvell devices? >> >> No, I think that would be a reasonable thing to do, I am still a little >> unclear how the older BCM5325 and friends work with respect to broadcom >> tags, but regardless, DSA now understands switches that do not support >> tags, so we should be good with some sort of b53 library. > >DSA doesn't allow me to use switch (hardware) VLANs. I would need to >handle all forwarding in CPU. The most powerful Broadcom MIPS SoC - >BCM4706 - can handle about 130 Mb/s. Less powerful - BCM4718A1 - only >about 50 Mb/s. >This is way too bad for performance when there is a 1 Gb/s switch and >too bad for CPU usage. Please correct me if I'm wrong Florian, but I believe that DSA does allow setting up chips to do forwarding without packets going to CPU. b53 looks like it fits nicely into DSA architecture. I believe that it should be integrated there. > >I guess the whole idea of switchdev was to allow what proposed version >of b53 does? To handle VLANs in hardware. > >-- >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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists