From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 2/4] net: Introduce generic bypass module Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:08:58 +0300 Message-ID: <20180419070752-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <1523386790-12396-1-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> <1523386790-12396-3-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> <20180411155127.GQ2028@nanopsycho> <6a8c1ff5-153a-e40a-91b3-48532b8d3a38@intel.com> <20180418092515.GB1989@nanopsycho> <20180418191315.GA1922@nanopsycho> <20180418222309-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180418203206.GC1922@nanopsycho> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Samudrala, Sridhar" , stephen@networkplumber.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, kubakici@wp.pl, jasowang@redhat.com, loseweigh@gmail.com To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:34912 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902AbeDSEJA (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2018 00:09:00 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180418203206.GC1922@nanopsycho> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:32:06PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> > With regards to alternate names for 'active', you suggested 'stolen', but i > >> >> > am not too happy with it. > >> >> > netvsc uses vf_netdev, are you OK with this? Or another option is 'passthru' > >> >> No. The netdev could be any netdevice. It does not have to be a "VF". > >> >> I think "stolen" is quite appropriate since it describes the modus > >> >> operandi. The bypass master steals some netdevice according to some > >> >> match. > >> >> > >> >> But I don't insist on "stolen". Just sounds right. > >> > > >> >We are adding VIRTIO_NET_F_BACKUP as a new feature bit to enable this feature, So i think > >> >'backup' name is consistent. > >> > >> It perhaps makes sense from the view of virtio device. However, as I > >> described couple of times, for master/slave device the name "backup" is > >> highly misleading. > > > >virtio is the backup. You are supposed to use another > >(typically passthrough) device, if that fails use virtio. > >It does seem appropriate to me. If you like, we can > >change that to "standby". Active I don't like either. "main"? > > Sounds much better, yes. Excuse me, which of the versions are better in your eyes? > > > > >In fact would failover be better than bypass? > > Also, much better. > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: virtio-dev-return-3867-cohuck=redhat.com@lists.oasis-open.org Sender: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Received: from lists.oasis-open.org (oasis-open.org [66.179.20.138]) by lists.oasis-open.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190A6581819D for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 21:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:08:58 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20180419070752-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <1523386790-12396-1-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> <1523386790-12396-3-git-send-email-sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> <20180411155127.GQ2028@nanopsycho> <6a8c1ff5-153a-e40a-91b3-48532b8d3a38@intel.com> <20180418092515.GB1989@nanopsycho> <20180418191315.GA1922@nanopsycho> <20180418222309-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20180418203206.GC1922@nanopsycho> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180418203206.GC1922@nanopsycho> Subject: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 2/4] net: Introduce generic bypass module To: Jiri Pirko Cc: "Samudrala, Sridhar" , stephen@networkplumber.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, kubakici@wp.pl, jasowang@redhat.com, loseweigh@gmail.com List-ID: On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:32:06PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> > With regards to alternate names for 'active', you suggested 'stolen', but i > >> >> > am not too happy with it. > >> >> > netvsc uses vf_netdev, are you OK with this? Or another option is 'passthru' > >> >> No. The netdev could be any netdevice. It does not have to be a "VF". > >> >> I think "stolen" is quite appropriate since it describes the modus > >> >> operandi. The bypass master steals some netdevice according to some > >> >> match. > >> >> > >> >> But I don't insist on "stolen". Just sounds right. > >> > > >> >We are adding VIRTIO_NET_F_BACKUP as a new feature bit to enable this feature, So i think > >> >'backup' name is consistent. > >> > >> It perhaps makes sense from the view of virtio device. However, as I > >> described couple of times, for master/slave device the name "backup" is > >> highly misleading. > > > >virtio is the backup. You are supposed to use another > >(typically passthrough) device, if that fails use virtio. > >It does seem appropriate to me. If you like, we can > >change that to "standby". Active I don't like either. "main"? > > Sounds much better, yes. Excuse me, which of the versions are better in your eyes? > > > > >In fact would failover be better than bypass? > > Also, much better. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org