On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:39:04 -0500 "Charles (Chas) Williams" <3chas3 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-11-04 at 23:40 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2015-10-14 09:41, Charles Williams: > > > On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 14:49 +0200, Olivier MATZ wrote: > > > > For PCI devices that have several interfaces (I think it's the case for > > > > some Mellanox boards), maybe we should not store the interface name? > > > > > > I am not sure what you mean here. If a device has multiple ethernet > > > interfaces, then it should a have seperate PCI device address space for > > > each interface (I dont know of any DPDK drivers that don't make this > > > assumption as well). > > > > mlx4 and cxgbe? > > OK, I see now. I don't know of a way to tell if a device has multiple > ports just from the pci vendor/device id without maintaining some > sort of table. > > Do these devices have multiple interfaces listed in their > /sys/devices/.../net diretory? If so, matching one of the listed > interfaces can just blacklist the whole device similar to blacklisting > by the device id. Devices with multiple ports are supposed to report the port via /sys/class/net/xxx/portid But you aren't going to be able to blacklist only one port of these devices. The two drivers would be fighting over registers and IRQ management. Plus kernel bind/unbind is by PCI id.
