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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 00:37:35 +0000 From: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> CC: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>, "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: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> > Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 11:28 AM > To: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com> > Cc: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>; 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 > > Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 06:34:22PM CET, parav@...lanox.com wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> > >> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 12:21 PM > >> To: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com> > >> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>; 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 > >> > >> Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 05:52:09PM CET, parav@...lanox.com wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> > >> >> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 11:14 AM > >> >> To: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com> > >> >> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>; 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 > >> >> > >> >> Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:14:53PM CET, parav@...lanox.com wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> >> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> > >> >> >> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 3:45 AM > >> >> >> To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> > >> >> >> Cc: Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>; 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 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 08:16:42PM CET, > >> >> >> jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:11:54 +0100, Jiri Pirko 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. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> >Yes, this subthread honestly makes me go from 60% sure to > >> >> >> >> >95% sure we shouldn't do the dual object thing :( Seems > >> >> >> >> >like Parav is already confused by it and suggests host port > >> >> >> >> >can exist without switch port :( > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Although I understand your hesitation, the host ports are > >> >> >> >> also associated with the asic and should be under the devlink > instance. > >> >> >> >> It is just a matter of proper documentation and clear code > >> >> >> >> to avoid confusions. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >They are certainly a part and belong to the ASIC, the question > >> >> >> >in my mind is more along the lines of do we want "one pipe/one > port" > >> >> >> >or is it okay to have multiple software objects of the same > >> >> >> >kind for those objects. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >To put it differently - do want a port object for each port of > >> >> >> >the ASIC or do we want a port object for each netdev.. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Perhaps "port" name of the object is misleading. From the > >> >> >> beginning, I ment to have it for both switch ports and host ports. > >> >> >> I admit that "host port" is a bit misleading, as it is not > >> >> >> really a port of eswitch, but the counter part. But if we > >> >> >> introduce another object for that purpose in devlink (like > >> >> >> "partititon"), it would be a lot of duplication > >> >> I think. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Question is, do we need the "host port"? Can't we just put a > >> >> >> relation to host netdev in the eswitch port. > >> >> >> > >> >> >Can you please explain how does it work for rdma for non sriov > >> >> >use > >> case? > >> >> >Do we have to create a fake eswitch object? > >> >> > >> >> Could you please provide details on "rdma for non sriov use case"? > >> >> > >> >There are multiple mdevs on PFs that happen to have link layer as IB > >> >and > >> those devlink instances have port that deserved to be configured same > >> way as that of Eth. > >> > >> Could you please describe it a bit more. There is still an eswitch > >> through which the traffic is going, isn't it? > >Yes, there is an eswitch but it doesn't have switch side of vports. > > Why? They should have. > It doesn't have. > > >It is equivalent to legacy mode. > >I hope you are not thinking to create fake eswitch vports. :-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists