On Thu, 11 Aug 2022 06:31:31 +0000 Chaoyong He <chaoyong...@corigine.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> > > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2022 12:25 PM > > To: Chaoyong He <chaoyong...@corigine.com> > > Cc: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>; Niklas > > Soderlund <niklas.soderl...@corigine.com>; dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/12] net/nfp: add flower ctrl VNIC related logics > > > > On Thu, 11 Aug 2022 01:26:49 +0000 > > Chaoyong He <chaoyong...@corigine.com> wrote: > > > > > > > The 'port_id' is the 'Device [external] port identifier', which > > > > > related with the 'rte_ethdev_devices[]' I think. > > > > > Here the ethdev we created is not exposed to the user and is not > > > > > in the > > > > 'rte_ethdev_devices[]' > > > > > array, so it can't be invoked by the user at all. > > > > > And we invoke this ethdev through a pointer in the `struct > > > > > nfp_net_hw`, so I think there should no conflict with other ones > > > > > in the > > > > system. > > > > > > > > DPDK already has a port ownership framework to deal with internal > > > > ethernet device ports. Why was this not used? > > > > > > Sorry I have no knowledge about this framework before. Any document > > > link or logic about this framework will be greatly appreciated. Thanks! > > > > It is part of ethdev https://doc.dpdk.org/api/rte__ethdev_8h.html > > > > See rte_eth_dev_owner_new, rte_eth_dev_owner_set, etc > > https://doc.dpdk.org/api/rte__ethdev_8h.html#ad6817cc801bf0faa566f52d3 > > 82214457 > > Thank you very much! > > If the app uses the rte_eth_dev_owner_* APIs to check the ownership first, it > does can > protect the internal ethdev ports. > But right now, the ovs-dpdk seems don't use these APIs at all, and it can use > 'port_id' to > get any ethdev port in rte_ethdev_devices[] array. > So maybe it's a good idea to keep our original logic and keep an eye on this > area, once > the ovs-dpdk use the rte_eth_dev_owner_* APIs, we'll update the logic here > accordingly. > > Thanks again! Once device is owned by something, then it is no longer show in the FOREACH and other iterators; so ovs-dpdk should be ok. This mechanism is how bonding, failsafe, and netvsc drivers handle sub devices. Therefore OVS should be smart enough to handle it.
