From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: phys_port_id in switchdev mode?
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 10:55:16 -0300
Message-ID: <20180903135516.GD4590@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20180828200539.1c0fe607@cakuba.netronome.com>
 <20180828204351.34fe457f@cakuba.netronome.com>
 <20180831201321.GA4590@localhost.localdomain>
 <20180901133412.2939466a@cakuba.netronome.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@gmail.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
        "mchan@broadcom.com" <mchan@broadcom.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
        Frederick Botha <frederick.botha@netronome.com>,
        nick viljoen <nick.viljoen@netronome.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-qt0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]:37709 "EHLO
        mail-qt0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1727278AbeICSPj (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 3 Sep 2018 14:15:39 -0400
Received: by mail-qt0-f173.google.com with SMTP id n6-v6so659997qtl.4
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 03 Sep 2018 06:55:21 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180901133412.2939466a@cakuba.netronome.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Sat, Sep 01, 2018 at 01:34:12PM +0200, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:13:22 -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 08:43:51PM +0200, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > Ugh, CC: netdev..
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 20:05:39 +0200, Jakub Kicinski wrote:  
> > > > Hi!
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder if we can use phys_port_id in switchdev to group together
> > > > interfaces of a single PCI PF?  Here is the problem:  
> > 
> > On Mellanox cards, this is already possible via phys_switch_id, as
> > each PF has its own phys_switch_id. So all VFs with a given
> > phys_switch_id belong to the PF with that same phys_switch_id.
> 
> You mean Connect-X4 and on, Connect-X3 also shares PF between ports.

Yes ConnectX-3 shares PF beween ports but doesn't support switchdev
mode.

I see the issue now. I was still considering the external ports as
uplink representors.