[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201218201804.GQ5487@ziepe.ca>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 16:18:04 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
"Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@...el.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next v4 00/15] Add mlx5 subfunction support
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 11:22:12AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> Also as far as the patch count complaints I have seen in a few threads
> I would be fine with splitting things up so that the devlink and aux
> device creation get handled in one set, and then we work out the
> details of mlx5 attaching to the devices and spawning of the SF
> netdevs in another since that seems to be where the debate is.
It doesn't work like that. The aux device creates a mlx5_core and
every mlx5_core can run mlx5_en.
This really isn't the series to raise this feature request. Adding an
optional short cut path to VF/SF is something that can be done later
if up to date benchmarks show it has value. There is no blocker in
this model to doing that.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists