[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200713154843.1009890a@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 15:48:43 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, Haiyue Wang <haiyue.wang@...el.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, nhorman@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, Nannan Lu <nannan.lu@...el.com>,
Andrew Bowers <andrewx.bowers@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 1/5] ice: add the virtchnl handler for AdminQ command
On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 10:43:16 -0700 Tony Nguyen wrote:
> From: Haiyue Wang <haiyue.wang@...el.com>
>
> The DCF (Device Config Function) is a named trust VF (always with ID 0,
> single entity per PF port) that can act as a sole controlling entity to
> exercise advance functionality such as adding switch rules for the rest
> of VFs.
But why? This looks like a bifurcated driver to me.
> To achieve this approach, this VF is permitted to send some basic AdminQ
> commands to the PF through virtual channel (mailbox), then the PF driver
> sends these commands to the firmware, and returns the response to the VF
> again through virtual channel.
>
> The AdminQ command from DCF is split into two parts: one is the AdminQ
> descriptor, the other is the buffer (the descriptor has BUF flag set).
> These two parts should be sent in order, so that the PF can handle them
> correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haiyue Wang <haiyue.wang@...el.com>
> Tested-by: Nannan Lu <nannan.lu@...el.com>
> Tested-by: Andrew Bowers <andrewx.bowers@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists