From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41541C43613 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 01:25:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2048C2084B for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 01:25:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731096AbfFTBZQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2019 21:25:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37384 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726096AbfFTBZQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2019 21:25:16 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2744307D925; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 01:25:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ovpn-112-53.rdu2.redhat.com (ovpn-112-53.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.112.53]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4E81001DD2; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 01:25:12 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <7c0e8909cee17623565ef88445b0497d5504fe1c.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] net: introduce Qualcomm IPA driver From: Dan Williams To: Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan , Arnd Bergmann Cc: Johannes Berg , Alex Elder , abhishek.esse@gmail.com, Ben Chan , Bjorn Andersson , cpratapa@codeaurora.org, David Miller , DTML , Eric Caruso , evgreen@chromium.org, Ilias Apalodimas , Linux ARM , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, Networking , syadagir@codeaurora.org Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 20:25:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <2926e45fd7ff62fd7c4af9b338bf0caa@codeaurora.org> References: <380a6185-7ad1-6be0-060b-e6e5d4126917@linaro.org> <066e9b39f937586f0f922abf801351553ec2ba1d.camel@sipsolutions.net> <613cdfde488eb23d7207c7ba6258662702d04840.camel@sipsolutions.net> <6c70950d0c78bc02a3d016918ec3929e@codeaurora.org> <2926e45fd7ff62fd7c4af9b338bf0caa@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5 (3.30.5-1.fc29) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.48]); Thu, 20 Jun 2019 01:25:16 +0000 (UTC) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-06-19 at 12:47 -0600, Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan wrote: > > > There is a n:1 relationship between rmnet and IPA. > > > rmnet does the de-muxing to multiple netdevs based on the mux id > > > in the MAP header for RX packets and vice versa. > > > > Oh, so you mean that even though IPA supports multiple channels > > and multiple netdev instances for a physical device, all the > > rmnet devices end up being thrown into a single channel in IPA? > > > > What are the other channels for in IPA? I understand that there > > is one channel for commands that is separate, while the others > > are for network devices, but that seems to make no sense if > > we only use a single channel for rmnet data. > > > > AFAIK, the other channels are for use cases like tethering. > There is only a single channel which is used for RX > data which is then de-muxed using rmnet. That seems odd, since tethering is no different than any other data channel in QMI, just that it may have a different APN and QoS guarantees. Dan