netdev - Re: Correct interpretation of VF link-state=auto

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: <CACT4oud-R9-5r-xTFArR4AM=CQrUKrs02RygZf5FAOFOW=Ov=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:21:30 +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: Re: Correct interpretation of VF link-state=auto

On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:34 PM Íñigo Huguet <ihuguet@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> 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

Hello,

Sorry for bumping, anybody has any idea that could help?
-- 
Íñigo Huguet