netdev - Re: [PATCH/RFC net-next 1/2] devlink: expose port function commands to assign VFs to multiple netdevs

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]

Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2023 12:40:45 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        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

Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 04:36:02PM CET, simon.horman@...igine.com wrote:
>From: Fei Qin <fei.qin@...igine.com>
>
>Multiple physical ports of the same NIC may share the single
>PCI address. In some cases, assigning VFs to different physical
>ports can be demanded, especially under high-traffic scenario.
>Load balancing can be realized in virtualised use¬cases through
>distributing packets between different physical ports with LAGs
>of VFs which are assigned to those physical ports.
>
>This patch adds new attribute "vf_count" to 'devlink port function'
>API which only can be shown and configured under devlink ports
>with flavor "DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL".

I have to be missing something. That is the meaning of "assigning VF"
to a physical port? Why there should be any relationship between
physical port and VF other than configured forwarding (using TC for
example)?

This seems very wrong. Preliminary NAK.


>
>e.g.
>$ 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
>    function:
>       vf_count 0
>
>$ devlink port function set pci/0000:82:00.0/0 vf_count 3
>
>$ 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
>    function:
>       vf_count 3
>
>Signed-off-by: Fei Qin <fei.qin@...igine.com>
>Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>