On 08/21/14 13:05, Florian Fainelli wrote:
2014-08-21 9:18 GMT-07:00 Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us>:
The goal of this is to provide a possibility to suport various switch
chips. Drivers should implement relevant ndos to do so. Now there is a
couple of ndos defines:
- for getting physical switch id is in place.
- for work with flows.
Note that user can use random port netdevice to access the switch.
I read through this patch set, and I still think that DSA is the
generic switch infrastructure we already have because it does provide
the following:
- taking a generic platform data structure (C struct or Device Tree),
validate, parse it and map it to internal kernel structures
- instantiate per-port network devices based on the configuration data provided
- delegate netdev_ops to the switch driver and/or the CPU NIC when relevant
- provide support for hooking RX and TX traffic coming from the CPU NIC
I would rather we build on the existing DSA infrastructure and add the
flow-related netdev_ops rather than having the two remain in
disconnect while flow-oriented switches driver get progressively
added. I guess I should take a closer look at the rocker driver to see
how hard would that be for you.
What do you think?
I thought we had concluded that DSA was a good path forward? Or maybe
at this stage we need to have several alternative approaches
and we eventually converge?
cheers,
jamal
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
