Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 06:29:44PM CET, akeem.g.abodun...@intel.com wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org] >> On Behalf Of Jiri Pirko >> Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2019 11:30 PM >> To: Parav Pandit <pa...@mellanox.com> >> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicin...@netronome.com>; da...@davemloft.net; >> oss-driv...@netronome.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/8] devlink: add PF and VF port flavours >> >> Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 05:59:04AM CET, pa...@mellanox.com wrote: >> > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org <netdev-ow...@vger.kernel.org> On >> >> Behalf Of Jiri Pirko >> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 6:17 AM >> >> To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicin...@netronome.com> >> >> Cc: da...@davemloft.net; oss-driv...@netronome.com; >> >> netdev@vger.kernel.org >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/8] devlink: add PF and VF port >> >> flavours >> >> >> >> Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 07:24:30PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >> >> >Current port flavours cover simple switches and DSA. Add PF and VF >> >> >flavours to cover "switchdev" SR-IOV NICs. >> >> > >> >> >Example devlink user space output: >> >> > >> >> >$ devlink port >> >> >pci/0000:82:00.0/0: type eth netdev p4p1 flavour physical >> >> >pci/0000:82:00.0/10000: type eth netdev eth0 flavour pcie_pf pf 0 >> >> >pci/0000:82:00.0/10001: type eth netdev eth1 flavour pcie_vf pf 0 vf >> >> >0 >> >> >pci/0000:82:00.0/10002: type eth netdev eth2 flavour pcie_vf pf 0 vf >> >> >1 >> >> >> >A given port is of its parent device. >> >In current scenario, its PF or VF. >> >Hence it should be device attribute and not a port attribute. >> >> I think that this works. You have VF_rep ports, PF_rep ports and PHYSICAL >> ports. >> In mlxsw for example, there are only PHYSICAL ports. >> In sr-iov world, there is also a PHYSICAL port on the eswitch. The others are >> either facing PF of VF. Looks accurate. I don't see any need for "devlink >> dev" >> flavour. > >I see what you're trying to do here, with VF_rep ports being independent of >PF_rep ports and PHYSICAL ports - however, my question is how do you >categorize VF_rep ports of the same parent PF physical ports (say you have >multi-port device, with 2 or more PFs), at least for identification purposes >per physical port? Do we need to have pci_vf_number appended to physical port >number?
Please wrap your messages at 80 cols. > >Thanks, >~Akeem >> >> >> >So devlink dev show command have to show what device flavour is. >> >Is it well known PCI VF or PF or something else. >> >It will show subdev device attribute and its parent PCI (PF/VF) devlink >> >device. >> >So we should have device flovour as PCI_PF or PCI_VF or SUBDEV. >> > >> >Again VF number showcasing here is very restrictive model. >> >Every PF/VF/Subdev represents its own 'port' and it is connected to eswitch >> 'port'. >> >Instead of showing VF here, it must be this 'port' or 'link' number that >> >gives >> right view. >> >Which netdev represents which VF is already linked in the VF rep-netdev >> >sysfs >> property. >> >> I think you confuse the eswtich ports (in Jakub's output it's them) and the >> actual >> VF. >> >> >> > >> >So flavour should be something like 'hostport' and when port is registered >> >for >> the eswitch side it should be 'switchport'. >> >With this there is very clear picture of which hostport is connected to >> >which >> eswitch port. >> >Just like how we see in the physical world. >> >
