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  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]
Date:   Thu, 3 Nov 2016 10:09:08 -0700
From:   Rick Jones <>
To:     Gal Pressman <>,
        "Mintz, Yuval" <>,
        Gal Pressman <>,
        "" <>,
        "John W. Linville" <>,
        Vidya Sagar Ravipati <>,
        Saeed Mahameed <>
Cc:     David Decotigny <>,
        Ben Hutchings <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] ethtool: Add actual port speed reporting

>> And besides, one can argue that in the SR-IOV scenario the VF has no business
>> knowing the physical port speed.
> Good point, but there are more use-cases we should consider.
> For example, when using Multi-Host/Flex-10/Multi-PF each PF should
> be able to query both physical port speed and actual speed.

Despite my email address, I'm not fully versed on VC/Flex, but I have 
always been under the impression that the flexnics created were, 
conceptually, "distinct" NICs considered independently of the physical 
port over which they operated.  Tossing another worm or three into the 
can, while "back in the day" (when some of the first ethtool changes to 
report speeds other than the "normal" ones went in) the speed of a 
flexnic was fixed, today, it can actually operate in a range.  From a 
minimum guarantee to an "if there is bandwidth available" cap.

rick jones

Powered by blists - more mailing lists