Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-31 Thread John Hurley
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:29 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:26:23AM CEST, john.hur...@netronome.com wrote: >>On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:08:48PM CEST, john.hur...@netronome.com wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Jakub K

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-30 Thread Jiri Pirko
Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:26:23AM CEST, john.hur...@netronome.com wrote: >On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:08:48PM CEST, john.hur...@netronome.com wrote: >>>On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski >>> wrote: On Fri, 25 May 2018 08:48:09 +020

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-30 Thread John Hurley
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:08:48PM CEST, john.hur...@netronome.com wrote: >>On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski >> wrote: >>> On Fri, 25 May 2018 08:48:09 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: Thu, May 24, 2018 at 04:22:47AM CEST, jakub.kicin.

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-29 Thread Jiri Pirko
Tue, May 29, 2018 at 04:08:48PM CEST, john.hur...@netronome.com wrote: >On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski > wrote: >> On Fri, 25 May 2018 08:48:09 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Thu, May 24, 2018 at 04:22:47AM CEST, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >>> >Hi! >>> > >>> >This series fro

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-29 Thread John Hurley
On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 25 May 2018 08:48:09 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Thu, May 24, 2018 at 04:22:47AM CEST, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >> >Hi! >> > >> >This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 >> >exposes the hash type

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-25 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Fri, 25 May 2018 08:48:09 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, May 24, 2018 at 04:22:47AM CEST, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: > >Hi! > > > >This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 > >exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp > >hashing matche

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Jiri Pirko
Thu, May 24, 2018 at 04:22:47AM CEST, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote: >Hi! > >This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 >exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp >hashing matches that of the software LAG. This may be unnecessarily >conservati

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread David Miller
From: Jakub Kicinski Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 19:22:47 -0700 > This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 > exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp > hashing matches that of the software LAG. This may be unnecessarily > conservative, let's see wh

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Thu, 24 May 2018 22:26:03 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 9:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski > wrote: > > On Thu, 24 May 2018 20:04:56 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > > >> Does this apply also to non-uplink representors? if yes, what is the use > >> case? > >> > >> We are looking on supp

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Or Gerlitz
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 9:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Thu, 24 May 2018 20:04:56 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> Does this apply also to non-uplink representors? if yes, what is the use >> case? >> >> We are looking on supporting uplink lag in sriov switchdev scheme - we refer >> to >> it as "

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Thu, 24 May 2018 11:23:00 -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > On 5/24/2018 10:04 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: > > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Jakub Kicinski > > wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 > >> exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Thu, 24 May 2018 20:04:56 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > Hi! > > > > This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 > > exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp > > hashing matches that of the s

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Samudrala, Sridhar
On 5/24/2018 10:04 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: Hi! This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp hashing matches that of the software LAG. This may be unn

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-24 Thread Or Gerlitz
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Hi! > > This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 > exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp > hashing matches that of the software LAG. This may be unnecessarily > conservative, let's see

[PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

2018-05-23 Thread Jakub Kicinski
Hi! This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver. Patch 5 exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp hashing matches that of the software LAG. This may be unnecessarily conservative, let's see what LAG maintainers think :) John says: This patchset sets up t