Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > > On 4/18/2018 10:07 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:00:51PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: >>> >>> On 4/18/2018 9:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Apr 18,

Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > On 4/18/2018 9:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:33:34PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: >>> >>> On 4/17/2018 5:26 PM, Siwei Liu wrote: I ran this with a few folks

Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/18/2018 10:07 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:00:51PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: On 4/18/2018 9:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:33:34PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: On 4/17/2018 5:26 PM, Siwei Liu wrote: I ran this with a

Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:00:51PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > On 4/18/2018 9:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:33:34PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > > > On 4/17/2018 5:26 PM, Siwei Liu wrote: > > > > I ran this with a few folks offline and gathered some

Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/18/2018 9:41 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:33:34PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: On 4/17/2018 5:26 PM, Siwei Liu wrote: I ran this with a few folks offline and gathered some good feedbacks that I'd like to share thus revive the discussion. First of all, as

Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:33:34PM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > On 4/17/2018 5:26 PM, Siwei Liu wrote: > > I ran this with a few folks offline and gathered some good feedbacks > > that I'd like to share thus revive the discussion. > > > > First of all, as illustrated in the reply below,

Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/17/2018 5:26 PM, Siwei Liu wrote: I ran this with a few folks offline and gathered some good feedbacks that I'd like to share thus revive the discussion. First of all, as illustrated in the reply below, cloud service providers require transparent live migration. Specifically, the main

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

I ran this with a few folks offline and gathered some good feedbacks that I'd like to share thus revive the discussion. First of all, as illustrated in the reply below, cloud service providers require transparent live migration. Specifically, the main target of our case is to support SR-IOV live

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 9:32 AM, David Miller wrote: > From: Siwei Liu > Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 19:32:05 -0700 > >> And I assume everyone here understands the use case for live >> migration (in the context of providing cloud service) is very >> different,

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:30:42 -0700 > Siwei Liu wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> >> No, implementation wise I'd avoid changing the class on

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 15:30:42 -0700 Siwei Liu wrote: > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > >> No, implementation wise I'd avoid changing the class on the fly. What > >> I'm looking to is a means to add a secondary class or class aliasing > >>

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> No, implementation wise I'd avoid changing the class on the fly. What >> I'm looking to is a means to add a secondary class or class aliasing >> mechanism for netdevs that allows mapping for a kernel device >> namespace

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

> No, implementation wise I'd avoid changing the class on the fly. What > I'm looking to is a means to add a secondary class or class aliasing > mechanism for netdevs that allows mapping for a kernel device > namespace (/class/net-kernel) to userspace (/class/net). Imagine > creating symlinks

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 8:19 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > Hi Siwei > >> I think everyone seems to agree not to fiddle with the ":" prefix, but >> rather have a new class of network subsystem under /sys/class thus a >> separate device namespace e.g. /sys/class/net-kernel for those >>

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

From: Siwei Liu Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 19:32:05 -0700 > And I assume everyone here understands the use case for live > migration (in the context of providing cloud service) is very > different, and we have to hide the netdevs. If not, I'm more than > happy to clarify. I

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

Hi Siwei > I think everyone seems to agree not to fiddle with the ":" prefix, but > rather have a new class of network subsystem under /sys/class thus a > separate device namespace e.g. /sys/class/net-kernel for those > auto-managed lower netdevs is needed. How do you get a device into this new

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:37 AM, David Miller wrote: > From: David Ahern > Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:21:54 -0600 > >> It is a netdev so there is no reason to have a separate ip command to >> inspect it. 'ip link' is the right place. > > I agree on this.

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

(put discussions back on list which got accidentally removed) On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 12:04:38 -0700 > Siwei Liu wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Stephen Hemminger >>

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

> Networking vendors have out of tree kernel modules. Those modules use a > netdev (call it a master netdev, a control netdev, cpu port, whatever) > to pull packets from the ASIC and deliver to virtual netdevices > representing physical ports. Sounds a lot like DSA. Please ask the vendor to

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 07:37:49PM CEST, da...@davemloft.net wrote: >From: David Ahern >Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:21:54 -0600 > >> It is a netdev so there is no reason to have a separate ip command to >> inspect it. 'ip link' is the right place. > >I agree on this. > >What I really

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:21 AM, David Ahern wrote: > On 4/4/18 1:36 AM, Siwei Liu wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:04 PM, David Ahern wrote: >>> On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > > There are other use cases that want to hide a device from

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:37:52 -0600 David Ahern wrote: > Networking vendors have out of tree kernel modules. Those modules use a > netdev (call it a master netdev, a control netdev, cpu port, whatever) > to pull packets from the ASIC and deliver to virtual netdevices >

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

From: David Ahern Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:37:52 -0600 > Networking vendors have out of tree kernel modules. Those modules use a > netdev (call it a master netdev, a control netdev, cpu port, whatever) > to pull packets from the ASIC and deliver to virtual netdevices >

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

[ dropping virtio-...@lists.oasis-open.org since it is a closed list and I am tired of deleting bounces ] On 4/4/18 2:28 AM, Siwei Liu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:04 PM, David Ahern wrote: >> On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: There are other use cases that

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

From: David Ahern Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:21:54 -0600 > It is a netdev so there is no reason to have a separate ip command to > inspect it. 'ip link' is the right place. I agree on this. What I really don't understand still is the use case... really. So there are control

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/4/18 1:36 AM, Siwei Liu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:04 PM, David Ahern wrote: >> On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. I >>> >>> What usecases do you have in mind? >> >> As mentioned in a

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:04 PM, David Ahern wrote: > On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> >>> There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. I >> >> What usecases do you have in mind? > > As mentioned in a previous response some kernel drivers create

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 11:19 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 03:04:26AM CEST, dsah...@gmail.com wrote: >>On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. I >>> >>> What usecases do you have in mind?

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:04 PM, David Ahern wrote: > On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> >>> There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. I >> >> What usecases do you have in mind? > > As mentioned in a previous response some kernel drivers create

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 03:04:26AM CEST, dsah...@gmail.com wrote: >On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> >>> There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. I >> >> What usecases do you have in mind? > >As mentioned in a previous response some kernel drivers create control

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/3/18 9:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >> There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. I > > What usecases do you have in mind? As mentioned in a previous response some kernel drivers create control netdevs. Just as in this case users should not be mucking with it, and

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 8:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 06:11:29PM CEST, dsah...@gmail.com wrote: >>On 4/1/18 3:13 AM, Si-Wei Liu wrote: >>> Hidden netdevice is not visible to userspace such that >>> typical network utilites e.g. ip, ifconfig and et al, >>>

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 05:13:09 -0400 Si-Wei Liu wrote: > Hidden netdevice is not visible to userspace such that > typical network utilites e.g. ip, ifconfig and et al, > cannot sense its existence or configure it. Internally > hidden netdev may associate with an upper level

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 06:11:29PM CEST, dsah...@gmail.com wrote: >On 4/1/18 3:13 AM, Si-Wei Liu wrote: >> Hidden netdevice is not visible to userspace such that >> typical network utilites e.g. ip, ifconfig and et al, >> cannot sense its existence or configure it. Internally >> hidden netdev may

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/3/18 1:40 AM, Siwei Liu wrote: >> There are other use cases that want to hide a device from userspace. > > Can you elaborate your case in more details? Looking at the links > below I realize that the purpose of hiding devices in your case is > quite different from the our migration case.

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 9:11 AM, David Ahern wrote: > On 4/1/18 3:13 AM, Si-Wei Liu wrote: >> Hidden netdevice is not visible to userspace such that >> typical network utilities e.g. ip, ifconfig and et al, >> cannot sense its existence or configure it. Internally >> hidden

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

On 4/1/18 3:13 AM, Si-Wei Liu wrote: > Hidden netdevice is not visible to userspace such that > typical network utilites e.g. ip, ifconfig and et al, > cannot sense its existence or configure it. Internally > hidden netdev may associate with an upper level netdev > that userspace has access to.

[RFC PATCH 2/3] netdev: kernel-only IFF_HIDDEN netdevice

Hidden netdevice is not visible to userspace such that typical network utilites e.g. ip, ifconfig and et al, cannot sense its existence or configure it. Internally hidden netdev may associate with an upper level netdev that userspace has access to. Although userspace cannot manipulate the lower