netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI ports

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: <VI1PR0501MB2271EFA6506D1A47C7EC8DFFD1470@VI1PR0501MB2271.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Mar 2019 19:44:21 +0000
From:   Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
CC:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "oss-drivers@...ronome.com" <oss-drivers@...ronome.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI
 ports



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 2:37 PM
> To: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>
> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>; Samudrala, Sridhar
> <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>; davem@...emloft.net;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org; oss-drivers@...ronome.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/7] devlink: allow subports on devlink PCI
> ports
> 
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 16:22:33 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> >>>>>>2. flavour should not be vf/pf, flavour should be hostport, switchport.
> >>>  >Because switch is flat and agnostic of pf/vf/mdev.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Not sure. It's good to have this kind of visibility.
> >>>>>
> >>>> port can have label/attribute indicating that this belong to VF-1
> >>>> or mdev as long as you are agreeing to have mdev attribute on host
> port.
> >>>> (and not ask for abstracting it, because mdev is well defined kernel
> object).
> >>>
> >>> Why mdev cannot be another flavour?
> >>>
> >>
> >> hostport is of type pf/vf/mdev connected to some switchport.
> >>
> >> So proposal is to have,
> >> port flavour = hostport/switchport
> >> port type/label = pf/vf/mdev
> >>
> > Instead of having two attributes per port, how about having, port
> > flavour= physical/cpu/dsa/pf/vf/mdev/switchport.
> >
> > physical and pf has some overlapping definitions.
> 
> What "overlapping definitions" do physical and PF have?
PF has physically user facing port.
And physical port in include/uapi/linux/devlink.h also describe that.