netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC 10/12] nfp: flower: create port for flower vnic

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: <20180323203202.2c0b4433@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Mar 2018 20:32:02 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, idosch@...lanox.com,
        mlxsw@...lanox.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        michael.chan@...adcom.com, ganeshgr@...lsio.com,
        saeedm@...lanox.com, simon.horman@...ronome.com,
        pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com, john.hurley@...ronome.com,
        dirk.vandermerwe@...ronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
        ogerlitz@...lanox.com, dsahern@...il.com, vijaya.guvva@...ium.com,
        satananda.burla@...ium.com, raghu.vatsavayi@...ium.com,
        felix.manlunas@...ium.com, gospo@...adcom.com,
        sathya.perla@...adcom.com, vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com,
        tariqt@...lanox.com, eranbe@...lanox.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 10/12] nfp: flower: create port for flower
 vnic

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 07:29:41 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >This will associate the PF netdev with physical port, incl. all ethtool
> >information.  Im not sure we want to do that.  phy_repr carries this
> >functionality.  
> 
> I was not sure originally what this port is. Okay, what I would like to
> see is another port flavour for "pf" and "vf". I guess that since the pf
> has the same pci address, it would fall under the same devlink instance.
> For vfs, which have each separate pci address, I would like to create
> devlink instance for each and associate with one devlink port flavour
> "vf".

Why do we need a devlink instance and phys port name for vfs?  Just
wondering..  It seems they should be covered by having different bus
address.  For full coverage of all netdevs?