On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 17:22:43 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 05:17:31PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: > >On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 07:07:01 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 09:56:28PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: > >> >On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 15:02:39 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 03:10:54AM CET, wrote: > >> >> >On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 09:52:04 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> >> Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 08:09:43PM CET, wrote: > >> >> >> >If the switchport is in the hypervisor then only the hypervisor can > >> >> >> >control switching/forwarding, correct? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Correct. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >The primary use case for partitioning within a VM (of a VF) would be > >> >> >> >containers (and DPDK)? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Makes sense. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >SR-IOV makes things harder. Splitting a PF is reasonably easy to > >> >> >> >grasp. > >> >> >> >I'm trying to get a sense of is how would we control an SR-IOV > >> >> >> >environment as a whole. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> You mean orchestration? > >> >> > > >> >> >Right, orchestration. > >> >> > > >> >> >To be clear on where I'm going with this - if we want to allow VFs > >> >> >to partition themselves then they have to control what is effectively > >> >> >a "nested" switch. A per-VF set of rules which would the get > >> >> > >> >> Wait. If you allow to make VF subports (I believe that is what you ment > >> >> by VFs partition themselves), that does not mean they will have a > >> >> separate nested switch. They would still belong under the same one. > >> > > >> >But that existing switch is administered by the hypervisor, how would > >> >the VF owners install forwarding rules in a switch they don't control? > >> > >> They won't. > > > >Argh. So how is forwarding configured if there are no rules? Are you > >going to assume its switching on MACs? We're supposed to offload > >software constructs. If its a software port it needs to be explicitly > >switched. If it's not explicitly switched - we already have macvlan > >offload. > > Wait a second. You configure the switch. And for that, you have the > switchports (representors). What we are talking about are VF (VF > subport) host legs. Am I missing something?
Hm :) So when VM gets a new port, how is it connected? Are we assuming all ports of a VM are plugged into one big L2 switch? The use case for those sub ports is a little murky, sorry about the endless confusion :)
