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:
>
> With a mix of PF and VF interfaces it gets increasingly difficult to
> figure out which one corresponds to which PF. We can identify which
> *representor* is which, by means of phys_port_name and devlink
> flavours. But if the actual VF/PF interfaces are also present on the
> same host, it gets confusing when one tries to identify the PF they
> came from. Generally one has to resort of matching between PCI DBDF of
> the PF and VFs or read relevant info out of ethtool -i.
>
> In multi host scenario this is particularly painful, as there seems to
> be no immediately obvious way to match PCI interface ID of a card (0,
> 1, 2, 3, 4...) to the DBDF we have connected.
>
> Another angle to this is legacy SR-IOV NDOs. User space picks a netdev
> from /sys/bus/pci/$VF_DBDF/physfn/net/ to run the NDOs on in somehow
> random manner, which means we have to provide those for all devices with
> link to the PF (all reprs). And we have to link them (a) because it's
> right (tm) and (b) to get correct naming. The only reliable way to make
> user space (libvirt) choose the repr it should run the NDOs on (which is
> IMHO the corresponding PF repr) is to set phys_port_id on actual VFs,
> VF reprs, PFs and PF reprs to a value corresponding to the *PCI PF*,
> not the external/Ethernet port when in switchdev mode. User space
> should understand phys_port_id in this context, given it was originally
> introduced for matching VFs to ports.
>
> I hope this explanation makes sense, and is correct. Please point out
> errors in my understanding, any comments would be appreciated! :)
>
> Jiri? Or? Others?
