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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20221128175448.3723f5ee@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:54:48 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Shannon Nelson <shnelson@....com> Cc: Shannon Nelson <snelson@...sando.io>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, mst@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, drivers@...sando.io Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 08/19] pds_core: initial VF configuration On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:08:28 -0800 Shannon Nelson wrote: > > Don't even start with the "our device is simple and only needs > > the legacy API" line of arguing :/ > > I'm not sure what else to say here - yes, we have a fancy and complex > piece of hardware plugged into the PCI slot, but the device that shows > up on the PCI bus is a very constrained model that doesn't know anything > about switchdev kinds of things. Today it is, but I presume it's all FW underneath. So a year from now you'll be back asking for extensions because FW devs added features. > >> The device model presented to the host is a simple PF with VFs, not a > >> SmartNIC, thus the pds_core driver sets up a simple PF netdev > >> "representor" for using the existing VF control API: easy to use, > >> everyone knows how to use it, keeps code simple. > >> > >> I suppose we could have the PF create a representor netdev for each > >> individual VF to set mac address and read stats, but that seems > > > > Oh, so the "representor" you mention in the cover letter is for the PF? > > Yes, a PF representor simply so we can get access to the .ndo_set_vf_xxx > interfaces. There is no network traffic running through the PF. In that case not only have you come up with your own name for a SmartNIC, you also managed to misuse one of our existing terms in your own way! It can't pass any traffic it's just a dummy to hook the legacy vf ndos to. It's the opposite of what a repr is.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists