On 4/17/2018 7:47 AM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 04:58:05PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Andy Gospodarek
<andrew.gospoda...@broadcom.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 07:08:39PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:
On 4/16/2018 5:39 AM, Andy Gospodarek wrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 09:01:16AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudr...@intel.com> wrote:
I meant between PFs on 2 compute nodes.
If the PF serves as uplink rep, it functions as a switch port -- applications
don't run on switch ports. One way to get apps to run on the host in switchdev
mode is probe one of the VFs there.
So once a pci device is configured in 'switchdev' mode, only port representor
netdevs are
seen on the host, no more PF netdev.
That is not the functionality I would propose. The PF netdev will still be
there.
Andy,
Basically LGTM, so even in smartnic configs, the PF @ the host is
still privileged to
create/destroy VFs or provision MACs for them even if it is not the
e-switch manager
anymore?
Yes, in a SmartNIC world one config we aim to have is that a host can create
and destroy VFs as needed. One of the challenges is how the VF reps are
managed by applications in the SmartNIC when the host could make them
disappear.
OK. So are we saying that in 'switchdev' mode with 2 VFs and 1 uplink, the host
will
see PF netdev, 2 vf-rep netdev's corresponding to 2 VFs and 1 uplink-rep netdev.
Is PF netdev used only for the control/configure of the VFs? If it used as a
datapath,
i think we need a pf-rep netdev too.
