Intel has not supported promiscuous mode for virtual functions due to the security concerns mentioned below.
There will be upstream support in an upcoming Linux kernel for setting virtual functions as "trusted" and when that is available then Intel will allow virtual functions to enter unicast promiscuous mode on those Ethernet controllers that support promiscuous mode for virtual functions in the HW/FW. Be aware that not all Intel Ethernet controllers have support for unicast promiscuous mode for virtual functions. The only currently released product that does is the X710/XL710. The key take away is that unicast promiscuous mode for X710/XL710 virtual functions requires Linux kernel support, iproute2 package support and driver support. Only when all three of these are in place will the feature work. Thanks, - Greg -----Original Message----- From: Zhang, Helin Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 9:04 AM To: bharath paulraj <bharathpaul at gmail.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>; Rowden, Aaron F <aaron.f.rowden at intel.com>; Rose, Gregory V <gregory.v.rose at intel.com> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Qiu, Michael <michael.qiu at intel.com>; Jayakumar, Muthurajan <muthurajan.jayakumar at intel.com> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] Reg: promiscuous mode on VF Hi Bharath For your question of "why intel does not support unicast promiscuos mode?", I'd ask Aaron or Greg to give answers. Thank you very much! Regards, Helin > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of bharath paulraj > Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 11:29 PM > To: Lu, Wenzhuo > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Reg: promiscuous mode on VF > > Hi Lu, > > Many thanks for your response. Again I have few more queries. > If VF unicast promiscuous mode is not supported then can't we > implement a Layer 2 bridging functionality using intel virtualization > technologies? Or Is there any other way, say tweeking some hardware > registers or drivers, which may help us in implementing Layer 2 bridging. > Also I would like to know, why intel does not support unicast promiscuos mode? > It could have been optional register settings and user should have had > a previleage to set or unset it. Besides, security reasons, is there > any other big reason why Intel does not support this? > > Thanks, > Bharath Paulraj > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Bharath, > > > > > 2) Is the above supported for 82599 controller? If it is > > > supported > > in the NIC, > > > please provide the steps to enable. > > Talking about 82599, VF unicast promiscuous mode is not supported. > > Only broadcast and multicast can be supported. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Bharath Paulraj > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Bharath
