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: <ZAWjZJ19I/I3N1jk@nanopsycho> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:25:08 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: "Lucero Palau, Alejandro" <alejandro.lucero-palau@....com> Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: devink dpipe implementation Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 01:05:14PM CET, alejandro.lucero-palau@....com wrote: >Hi, > >I'm looking at the devlink dpipe functionality for considering using it >with AMD ef100. What is your goal? > >There is just one driver using it, Mellanox spectrum switch, as a >reference apart from the devlink core code. > >I wonder if due to this limited usage the implementation is not covering >other needs or maybe I'm missing something. > >For example: > >enum devlink_dpipe_match_type { > DEVLINK_DPIPE_MATCH_TYPE_FIELD_EXACT, >}; > >It seems obvious other matches should be supported, at least for >supporting matching based on masks. Is this because spectrum switch does >only have BCAMs? dpipe exposes ASIC pipeline to the user to provide visibility. In case of mlxsw, there are only some fragments exposed. There the exact match is enough. > > >Other examples: > >enum devlink_dpipe_field_ethernet_id { > DEVLINK_DPIPE_FIELD_ETHERNET_DST_MAC, >}; > >enum devlink_dpipe_field_ipv4_id { > DEVLINK_DPIPE_FIELD_IPV4_DST_IP, >}; > >Again, I guess other fields should be support. > >If this is because only that needed by the only driver using it was >added, I guess using dpipe for ef100 would need to add more support to >the devlink dpipe core. Sure. > >Can someone clarify this to me? > >Thanks. >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists