[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SN2PR11MB009472734B1803F20C4A9B1497EA0@SN2PR11MB0094.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:08:14 +0000
From: Yuval Mintz <Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com>
To: Hariprasad Shenai <hariprasad@...lsio.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"leedom@...lsio.com" <leedom@...lsio.com>,
"nirranjan@...lsio.com" <nirranjan@...lsio.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 1/2] cxgb4/cxgb4vf: Add support for
ndo_set_vf_vlan
> @@ -1202,6 +1202,10 @@ int t4vf_eth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
> net_device *dev)
> BUG_ON(qidx >= pi->nqsets);
> txq = &adapter->sge.ethtxq[pi->first_qset + qidx];
>
> + if (pi->vlan_id && !skb_vlan_tag_present(skb))
> + __vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, cpu_to_be16(ETH_P_8021Q),
> + pi->vlan_id);
> +
So it's a purely SW implementation of the feature on the VF side?
Does the HW enforces the configuration in any way on the VF?
Also, looks like an already tagged packet would be processed with
the original vlan-id [instead of the one of PF has provided].
Is that intentional?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists