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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACT4oueyNoQAVW1FDcS_aus9sUqNvJhj87e_kUEkzz3azm2+pQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:34:00 +0200
From:   Íñigo Huguet <ihuguet@...hat.com>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>,
        Edward Harold Cree <ecree@...inx.com>,
        Dinan Gunawardena <dinang@...inx.com>,
        Pablo Cascon <pabloc@...inx.com>
Subject: Correct interpretation of VF link-state=auto

Hi,

Regarding link-state attribute for a VF, 'man ip-link' says:
state auto|enable|disable - set the virtual link state as seen by the
specified VF. Setting to auto means a reflection of the PF link state,
enable lets the VF to communicate with other VFs on this host even if
the PF link state is down, disable causes the HW to drop any packets
sent by the VF.

However, I've seen that different interpretations are made about that
explanation, especially about "auto" configuration. It is not clear if
it should follow PF "physical link status" or PF "administrative link
status". With the latter, `ip set PF down` would put the VF down too,
but with the former you'd have to disconnect the physical port.

Thanks
-- 
Íñigo Huguet

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ