netdev - Re: [PATCH RESEND iproute2-next] devlink: Add optional controller user input

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: <c30727a7-49a5-db18-ed16-e96e55ec66a3@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Jun 2021 19:35:18 +0800
From:   Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To:     Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>,
        "dsahern@...il.com" <dsahern@...il.com>,
        "stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
        "moyufeng@...wei.com" <moyufeng@...wei.com>,
        "linuxarm@...neuler.org" <linuxarm@...neuler.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND iproute2-next] devlink: Add optional controller
 user input

On 2021/6/9 17:24, Parav Pandit wrote:
>> From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
>>
>> I thought the representor ports of a PF'eswitch is decided by the function
>> under a specific PF(For example, the PF itself and the VF under this PF)?
> 
> Eswitch is not per PF in context of smartnic/multi-host.

So the Eswitch may be per PF in context of *non*-"smartnic/multi-host",
right?
It seems that it makes more sense to set the eswitch mode based on
devlink port instance instead of devlink instance if devlink instance
represents a multi-function ASIC?

> PF _has_ eswitch that contains the representor ports for PF, VF, SF.
> 
>>
>>> Each representor port represent either PF, VF or SF.
>>> This PF, VF or SF can be of local controller residing on the eswitch device or
>> it can be of an external controller(s).
>>> Here external controller = 1.
>>
>> If I understood above correctly:
>> The fw/hw decide which PF has the eswitch, and how many
>> devlink/representor port does this eswitch has?
> Number of ports are dynamic. When new SFs/VFs are created, ports get added to the switch.
> 
>> Suppose PF0 of controller_num=0 in have the eswitch, and the eswitch may
>> has devlink/representor port representing other PF, like PF1 in
>> controller_num=0, and even PF0/PF1 in controller_num=1?
> Yes. Correct.

Thanks for clarifying, I think I can see the big picture now.

>