netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 00/14] sfc: add vDPA support for EF100 devices

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:   Mon, 10 Apr 2023 09:39:38 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Gautam Dawar <gautam.dawar@....com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-net-drivers@....com,
        Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
        Martin Habets <habetsm.xilinx@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        eperezma@...hat.com, harpreet.anand@....com, tanuj.kamde@....com,
        koushik.dutta@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 00/14] sfc: add vDPA support for EF100 devices

On Sun, Apr 9, 2023 at 5:13 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 01:40:01PM +0530, Gautam Dawar wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > This series adds the vdpa support for EF100 devices.
> > For now, only a network class of vdpa device is supported and
> > they can be created only on a VF. Each EF100 VF can have one
> > of the three function personalities (EF100, vDPA & None) at
> > any time with EF100 being the default. A VF's function personality
> > is changed to vDPA while creating the vdpa device using vdpa tool.
>
> Jakub,
>
> I wonder if it is not different approach to something that other drivers
> already do with devlink enable knobs (DEVLINK_PARAM_GENERIC_ID_ENABLE_*)
> and auxiliary bus.

I think the auxiliary bus fits here, and I've proposed to use that in
V2 of this series.

Thanks

>
> Thanks
>