[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230206184227.64d46170@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 18:42:27 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Fei Qin <fei.qin@...igine.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, oss-drivers@...igine.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC net-next 1/2] devlink: expose port function commands
to assign VFs to multiple netdevs
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 16:36:02 +0100 Simon Horman wrote:
> +VF assignment setup
> +---------------------------
> +In some cases, NICs could have multiple physical ports per PF. Users can assign VFs to
> +different ports.
Please make sure you run make htmldocs when changing docs,
this will warn.
> +- Get count of VFs assigned to physical port::
> +
> + $ devlink port show pci/0000:82:00.0/0
> + pci/0000:82:00.0/0: type eth netdev enp130s0np0 flavour physical port 0 splittable true lanes 4
Physical port has VFs? My knee jerk reaction is that allocating
resources via devlink is fine but this seems to lean a bit into
forwarding. How do other vendors do it? What's the mapping of VFs
to ports?
What do you suggest should happen when user enables switchdev mode?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists