> On 01/15/2019 09:47 AM, Ophir Munk wrote: > > Dpdk port representors were introduced in dpdk versions 18.xx. > > Prior to port representors there was a one-to-one relationship between > > an rte device (e.g. PCI bus) and an eth device (referenced as dpdk > > port id in OVS). With port representors the relationship becomes > > one-to-many rte device to eth devices. > > For example in [3] there are two devices (representors) using the same > > PCI physical address 0000:08:00.0: "0000:08:00.0,representor=[3]" and > > "0000:08:00.0,representor=[5]". > > This commit handles the new one-to-many relationship. For example, > > when one of the device port representors in [3] is closed - the PCI > > bus cannot be detached until the other device port representor is > > closed as well. OVS remains backward compatible by supporting dpdk > > legacy PCI ports which do not include port representors. > > Dpdk port representors related commits are listed in [1]. Dpdk port > > representors documentation appears in [2]. A sample configuration > > which uses two representors ports (the output of "ovs-vsctl show" > > command) is shown in [3]. > > > > Hi Ophir, I had a scan through and there isn't any documentation/examples > for this outside the commit message. I think a user would need something > basic, or at least reference to know that this exists and how to use it.
+1, although I can confirm the backwards compatibility with the legacy pci port methodology I'm seeing issues around the use of representors which I'm not entirely sure are user configuration related or specific to the patch implementation, will need more time to investigate and confirm. Ian _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
