From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: [patch net-next 00/26] bonding/team offload + mlxsw implementation Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 07:53:35 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1448977744-17930-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <20151201144300.GB2165@nanopsycho.orion> <20151201151243.GC2165@nanopsycho.orion> <20151201164719.GA2548@nanopsycho> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Linux Netdev List , David Miller , Ido Schimmel , Elad Raz , yotamg@mellanox.com, Or Gerlitz , pjonnala@broadcom.com, Jay Vosburgh , vfalico@gmail.com, Andy Gospodarek , Florian Fainelli , Scott Feldman , john fastabend To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-f171.google.com ([209.85.213.171]:36224 "EHLO mail-ig0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750884AbbLBFxf (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 00:53:35 -0500 Received: by igcph11 with SMTP id ph11so103695586igc.1 for ; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 21:53:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20151201164719.GA2548@nanopsycho> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 05:35:43PM CET, gerlitz.or@gmail.com wrote: >>On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 04:06:23PM CET, gerlitz.or@gmail.com wrote: >>>>On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>>>> Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:48:38PM CET, jiri@resnulli.us wrote: >>>>>>This patchset introduces needed infrastructure for link aggregation >>>>>>offload - for both team and bonding. It also implements the offload >>>>>>in mlxsw driver. >>>>I didn't see any changes to switchdev.h, can you elaborate on that please. >>> Correct. This patchset does not extend switchdev api. The extension is >>> done for netdev notifiers. It seems natural and correct. >>> As we discussed already with John on a different thread, it makes sense >>> for non-switchdev drivers to benefit from this extensions as well. >>This is understood. >>However, the point which is still not clear to me related to the LAG / >>switchdev object model. >>All of FDB/VLAN/FIB switchdev objects have corresponding software counterparts >>in the kernel --- what's the case for LAG? the software construct is >>bond or team >>instance, shouldn't there be a modeling of the HW LAG object in switchdev? > No need for that, what that would be good for? I'll give it 2nd thought, also lets see what other reviewers think on this matter. Another question relates to users bonding/teaming netdevice ports from different HW switches, or of two vlans over ports from the same HW switch. This is something that AFAIK not supported by HW -- do we want to disallow that? what layer in the kernel we want to enforce that limitation? team/bond or switchdev core or the switchdev HW driver? > Switchdev iface (most of it) works with struct net_device. Does not matter > if that is the port netdev direclty, or if it is team/bonding netdev. > It falls into the picture very nicely. Or.