netdev - Re: SRIOV switchdev mode BoF minutes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMiDundB9p0CvnQ33mLm=7OvG4Yvd5ASH9uR+TkCd_uJhg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Apr 2018 23:16:19 +0300
From:   Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:     "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Anjali Singhai Jain <anjali.singhai@...el.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...adcom.com>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Rony Efraim <ronye@...lanox.com>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SRIOV switchdev mode BoF minutes

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudrala@...el.com> wrote:
> On 4/13/2018 1:57 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote:


>>> in  overlay networks scheme, the uplink rep has the VTEP ip and is not connected
>>> to the bridge, e.g you use ovs you have vf reps and vxlan ports connected
>>> to ovs and the ip stack routes through the uplink rep

> This changes the legacy mode behavior of configuring  vtep ip on the pf
> netdev. How does host to host traffic expected to work when vtep ip is moved to uplink rep?

What do you mean host to host traffic, is that two VFs on the same host?
control plane SWs (such as OVS) don't apply encapsulation within the same host

>>>> What about pf-rep?

> Are you planning to create a pf-rep too? Is pf also treated similar to vf in
> switchdev mode?
> All pf traffic goes to pf-rep and pf-rep traffic goes to pf by default
> without any rules programmed?

@ the sriov switchdev ARCH level, pf/pf-rep would work indeed as you described.

We will have pf rep for smartnic schemes where the the pf on the host
is not the manager of the eswitch but rather the smartnic driver instance.

on non smart env, there are some challenges to address for the pf
nic to be fully functional for the slow path (what you described), we
will get there down the road if there is a real need.