netdev - Re: [net-next V9 03/14] devlink: Support add and delete devlink port

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: <39a18d59-308b-f065-992b-0afce857b6c7@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Jan 2021 13:23:15 -0800
From:   Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>,
        "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "alexander.duyck@...il.com" <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        "edwin.peer@...adcom.com" <edwin.peer@...adcom.com>,
        "dsahern@...nel.org" <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        "kiran.patil@...el.com" <kiran.patil@...el.com>,
        "david.m.ertman@...el.com" <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
        "dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Vu Pham <vuhuong@...dia.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next V9 03/14] devlink: Support add and delete devlink port



On 1/21/2021 7:31 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> 
>> From: Samudrala, Sridhar <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
>> Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 2:21 AM
>>
>>> $ devlink port show
>>> pci/0000:06:00.0/65535: type eth netdev ens2f0np0 flavour physical
>>> port 0 splittable false
>>>
>>> $ devlink port add pci/0000:06:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 88
>>
>> Do we need to specify pfnum when adding a SF port? Isn't this redundant?
>> Isn't there a 1:1 mapping between the pci device and a pfnum?
>>
> No. it's not entirely redundant.
> Currently in most cases today it is same function number as that of PCI device.


> Netronome has one devlink instance that represents multiple PCI devices.

I am curious how this is done. I looked at doing this for ice but it
became incredibly problematic because of interacting across multiple
PCIe drivers.. Hmm. I'll have to go look at how this is handled in the
netronome driver.

Thanks,
Jake