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]

Date:   Mon, 18 Mar 2019 12:59:35 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.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

On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 19:44:21 +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > -----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.

PF doesn't "have a user facing port" in switchdev mode.  It's a
limitation of Mellanox HW that you have some strong association 
there.

> And physical port in include/uapi/linux/devlink.h also describe that.

By "that" you must mean that the physical is a user facing port.