[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMhjaL0kCzx5Cze3pf_O1ZNhPETWAqH-kuayN55gBgWkaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 22:50:38 +0200
From: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
nhorman@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com, jogreene@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next 07/15] i40e: Implement an ethtool private flag to stop
LLDP in FW
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:24 PM, Jeff Kirsher
<jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> wrote:
> From: Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>
>
> Implement the private flag disable-fw-lldp for ethtool
> to disable the processing of LLDP packets by the FW.
> This will stop the FW from consuming LLDPDU and cause
> them to be sent up the stack.
>
> The FW is also being configured to apply a default DCB
> configuration on link up.
>
> Toggling the value of this flag will also cause a PF reset.
>
> Disabling FW DCB will also disable DCBx.
wait, isn't there a knob in the DCB NL UAPI to state where the DCBx
state-machine runs {nowhere, host, firmware}, I am pretty much there is
such, and if not, why not add it there instead of private flags?
Or.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists