Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 06:26:12AM CEST, pa...@nvidia.com wrote: > > >> From: Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 2:59 AM >> >> On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 11:17:42 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> > >> The external PFs need to have an extra attribute with "external >> > >> enumeration" what would be used for the representor netdev name as well. >> > >> >> > >> pci/0000:00:08.0/0: type eth netdev enp0s8f0 flavour physical >> > >> pci/0000:00:08.0/1: type eth netdev enp0s8f0_pf0 flavour pcipf >> > >> pfnum 0 >> > >> pci/0000:00:08.0/2: type eth netdev enp0s8f0_e0pf0 flavour pcipf >> > >> extnum 0 pfnum 0 >> > > >> > >How about a prefix of "ec" instead of "e", like? >> > >pci/0000:00:08.0/2: type eth netdev enp0s8f0_ec0pf0 flavour pcipf >> > >ecnum 0 pfnum 0 >> > >> > Yeah, looks fine to me. Jakub? >> >> I don't like that local port doesn't have the controller ID. >> >Adding controller ID to local port will change name for all non smartnic >deployments that affects current vast user base :-( > >> Whether PCI port is external or not is best described by a the peer relation. > >How about adding an attribute something like below in addition to controller >id. > >$ devlink port show >pci/0000:00:08.0/1: type eth netdev enp0s8f0_pf0 flavour pcipf pfnum 0 ecnum 0 >external true splitable false > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> Failing that, at the very least "external" should be a separate >> attribute/flag from >> the controller ID. >> >Ok. Looks fine to me. > >Jiri?
Yeah, why not. > >> I didn't quite get the fact that you want to not show controller ID on the >> local >> port, initially. >Mainly to not_break current users. You don't have to take it to the name, unless "external" flag is set. But I don't really see the point of showing !external, cause such controller number would be always 0. Jakub, why do you think it is needed?
