[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:03:32AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 08:24:43AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >On 4/10/2018 11:03 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:59:02PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >> > On 4/10/2018 8:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> > > Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:27:48PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > On 4/10/2018 8:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> > > > > Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:40PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > On 4/10/2018 3:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> > > > > > > Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:47:06PM CEST,
> >> > > > > > > sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST,
> >> > > > > > > > > sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > [...]
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > net_device *bypass_netdev,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + struct net_device
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > *child_netdev)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +{
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +bool backup;
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent ==
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +if (backup ?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +"%s attempting to join
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > bypass dev when %s already present\n",
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > +child_netdev->name, backup
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > ? "backup" : "active");
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Bypass module should check if there is already some
> >> > > > > > > > > > > other netdev
> >> > > > > > > > > > > enslaved and refuse right there.
> >> > > > > > > > > > This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but
> >> > > > > > > > > > this check has to be done by netvsc
> >> > > > > > > > > > as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
> >> > > > > > > > > > Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module
> >> > > > > > > > > > to indicate if the driver is doing
> >> > > > > > > > > > a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this
> >> > > > > > > > > > check can be done in bypass module
> >> > > > > > > > > > for 3 netdev scenario.
> >> > > > > > > > > Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the
> >> > > > > > > > > difference would be
> >> > > > > > > > > between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
> >> > > > > > > > > 2netdev:
> >> > > > > > > > >bypass_master
> >> > > > > > > > > /
> >> > > > > > > > > /
> >> > > > > > > > > VF_slave
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > 3netdev:
> >> > > > > > > > >bypass_master
> >> > > > > > > > > / \
> >> > > > > > > > > / \
> >> > > > > > > > > VF_slave backup_slave
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Looks correct.
> >> > > > > > > > VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are
> >> > > > > > > > present in both the models.
> >> > > > > > > > In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and
> >> > > > > > > > VF_slave and backup_slave are
> >> > > > > > > > marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
> >> > > > > > > You say it looks correct and in another sentence you provide
> >> > > > > > > completely
> >> > > > > > > different description. Could you please look again?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > To be exact, 2 netdev model with netvsc looks like this.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > netvsc_netdev
> >> > > > > > /
> >> > > > > >/
> >> > > > > > VF_slave
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > With virtio_net, 3 netdev model
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > bypass_netdev
> >> > > > > > / \
> >> > > > > >/ \
> >> > > > > > VF_slave virtio_net netdev
> >> > > > > Could you also mark the original netdev which is there now? is it
> >> > > > > bypass_netdev or virtio_net_netdev ?
> >> > > > bypass_netdev
> >> > > > / \
> >> > > > / \
> >> > > > VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original)
> >> > > That does not make sense.
> >> > > 1) You diverge from the behaviour
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On 4/10/2018 11:03 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:59:02PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 8:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:27:48PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 8:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:40PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 3:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:47:06PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
[...]
+static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device *bypass_netdev,
+struct net_device *child_netdev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
+ bool backup;
+
+ vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
+ backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent == bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
+ if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
+ rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
+ netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
+ "%s attempting to join bypass dev when %s already
present\n",
+ child_netdev->name, backup ? "backup" : "active");
Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
enslaved and refuse right there.
This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check has to be
done by netvsc
as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to indicate if the
driver is doing
a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check can be done in
bypass module
for 3 netdev scenario.
Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the difference would be
between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
2netdev:
bypass_master
/
/
VF_slave
3netdev:
bypass_master
/ \
/ \
VF_slave backup_slave
Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
Looks correct.
VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are present in both the
models.
In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and VF_slave and
backup_slave are
marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
You say it looks correct and in another sentence you provide completely
different description. Could you please look again?
To be exact, 2 netdev model with netvsc looks like this.
netvsc_netdev
/
/
VF_slave
With virtio_net, 3 netdev model
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev
Could you also mark the original netdev which is there now? is it
bypass_netdev or virtio_net_netdev ?
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original)
That does not make sense.
1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original
netdev is a master of the VF
2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address
configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every
incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to
move the configuration to the new master device.
This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both
netvsc and virtio_net.
Forgot to mention that bypass_netdev takes over the name of the original
netdev and
virtio_net netdev will get the backup name.
What do you mean by "name"?
bypass_netdev also is associated with the same pci device as the original
virtio_net
netdev via SET_NETDEV_DEV(). Also, we added ndo_get_phys_port_name() to
virtio_net
that will return _bkup when BACKUP feature is enabled.
So for ex: if virtio_net inteface was getting 'ens12' as the name assigned by
udev
without BACKUP feature, when BACKUP feature is enabled, the bypass_netdev
will be
named 'ens12' and the original virtio_net will get named as ens12n_bkup.
So the userspace network configuration doesn't need to change.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On 4/10/2018 8:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:27:48PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 8:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:40PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 3:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:47:06PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
[...]
+static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device *bypass_netdev,
+struct net_device *child_netdev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
+ bool backup;
+
+ vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
+ backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent == bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
+ if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
+ rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
+ netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
+ "%s attempting to join bypass dev when %s already
present\n",
+ child_netdev->name, backup ? "backup" : "active");
Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
enslaved and refuse right there.
This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check has to be
done by netvsc
as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to indicate if the
driver is doing
a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check can be done in
bypass module
for 3 netdev scenario.
Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the difference would be
between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
2netdev:
bypass_master
/
/
VF_slave
3netdev:
bypass_master
/ \
/ \
VF_slave backup_slave
Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
Looks correct.
VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are present in both the
models.
In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and VF_slave and
backup_slave are
marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
You say it looks correct and in another sentence you provide completely
different description. Could you please look again?
To be exact, 2 netdev model with netvsc looks like this.
netvsc_netdev
/
/
VF_slave
With virtio_net, 3 netdev model
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev
Could you also mark the original netdev which is there now? is it
bypass_netdev or virtio_net_netdev ?
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original)
That does not make sense.
1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original
netdev is a master of the VF
2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address
configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every
incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to
move the configuration to the new master device.
This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both
netvsc and virtio_net.
Forgot to mention that bypass_netdev takes over the name of the original
netdev and
virtio_net netdev will get the backup name.
So the userspace network configuration doesn't need to change.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:27:48PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
>>On 4/10/2018 8:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:40PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
>>> > On 4/10/2018 3:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> > > Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:47:06PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
>>> > > > On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> > > > > Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> > > > > > > Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST,
>>> > > > > > > sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
>>> > > > > [...]
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > +static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device
>>> > > > > > > > *bypass_netdev,
>>> > > > > > > > + struct net_device
>>> > > > > > > > *child_netdev)
>>> > > > > > > > +{
>>> > > > > > > > + struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
>>> > > > > > > > + bool backup;
>>> > > > > > > > +
>>> > > > > > > > + vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
>>> > > > > > > > + backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent ==
>>> > > > > > > > bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
>>> > > > > > > > + if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
>>> > > > > > > > + rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
>>> > > > > > > > + netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
>>> > > > > > > > + "%s attempting to join bypass dev
>>> > > > > > > > when %s already present\n",
>>> > > > > > > > + child_netdev->name, backup ?
>>> > > > > > > > "backup" : "active");
>>> > > > > > > Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
>>> > > > > > > enslaved and refuse right there.
>>> > > > > > This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check
>>> > > > > > has to be done by netvsc
>>> > > > > > as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
>>> > > > > > Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to
>>> > > > > > indicate if the driver is doing
>>> > > > > > a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check
>>> > > > > > can be done in bypass module
>>> > > > > > for 3 netdev scenario.
>>> > > > > Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the difference
>>> > > > > would be
>>> > > > > between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
>>> > > > > 2netdev:
>>> > > > > bypass_master
>>> > > > > /
>>> > > > >/
>>> > > > > VF_slave
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > 3netdev:
>>> > > > > bypass_master
>>> > > > > / \
>>> > > > >/ \
>>> > > > > VF_slave backup_slave
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > Looks correct.
>>> > > > VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are present in
>>> > > > both the models.
>>> > > > In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and VF_slave
>>> > > > and backup_slave are
>>> > > > marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
>>> > > You say it looks correct and in another sentence you provide completely
>>> > > different description. Could you please look again?
>>> > >
>>> > To be exact, 2 netdev model with netvsc looks like this.
>>> >
>>> > netvsc_netdev
>>> > /
>>> > /
>>> > VF_slave
>>> >
>>> > With virtio_net, 3 netdev model
>>> >
>>> > bypass_netdev
>>> > / \
>>> > / \
>>> > VF_slave virtio_net netdev
>>> Could you also mark the original netdev which is there now? is it
>>> bypass_netdev or virtio_net_netdev ?
>>
>> bypass_netdev
>> / \
>>/ \
>>VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original)
>
> That does not make sense.
> 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original
>netdev is a master of the VF
> 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address
>configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every
>incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to
>move the configuration to the new master device.
That's exactly the point why I need to hide the lower netdev slaves
and trying the align the naming of the bypass with where IP was
configured on the original netdev. The current 3-netdev model is not
"transparent" by any means.
-Siwei
> This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both
> netvsc and virtio_net.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On 4/10/2018 8:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 05:13:40PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/10/2018 3:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:47:06PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
[...]
+static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device *bypass_netdev,
+struct net_device *child_netdev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
+ bool backup;
+
+ vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
+ backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent == bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
+ if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
+ rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
+ netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
+ "%s attempting to join bypass dev when %s already
present\n",
+ child_netdev->name, backup ? "backup" : "active");
Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
enslaved and refuse right there.
This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check has to be
done by netvsc
as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to indicate if the
driver is doing
a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check can be done in
bypass module
for 3 netdev scenario.
Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the difference would be
between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
2netdev:
bypass_master
/
/
VF_slave
3netdev:
bypass_master
/ \
/ \
VF_slave backup_slave
Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
Looks correct.
VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are present in both the
models.
In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and VF_slave and
backup_slave are
marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
You say it looks correct and in another sentence you provide completely
different description. Could you please look again?
To be exact, 2 netdev model with netvsc looks like this.
netvsc_netdev
/
/
VF_slave
With virtio_net, 3 netdev model
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev
Could you also mark the original netdev which is there now? is it
bypass_netdev or virtio_net_netdev ?
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On 4/10/2018 3:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:47:06PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
[...]
+static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device *bypass_netdev,
+struct net_device *child_netdev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
+ bool backup;
+
+ vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
+ backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent == bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
+ if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
+ rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
+ netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
+ "%s attempting to join bypass dev when %s already
present\n",
+ child_netdev->name, backup ? "backup" : "active");
Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
enslaved and refuse right there.
This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check has to be
done by netvsc
as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to indicate if the
driver is doing
a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check can be done in
bypass module
for 3 netdev scenario.
Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the difference would be
between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
2netdev:
bypass_master
/
/
VF_slave
3netdev:
bypass_master
/ \
/ \
VF_slave backup_slave
Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
Looks correct.
VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are present in both the
models.
In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and VF_slave and
backup_slave are
marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
You say it looks correct and in another sentence you provide completely
different description. Could you please look again?
To be exact, 2 netdev model with netvsc looks like this.
netvsc_netdev
/
/
VF_slave
With virtio_net, 3 netdev model
bypass_netdev
/ \
/ \
VF_slave virtio_net netdev
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On 4/9/2018 1:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 12:59:14AM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
[...]
+static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device *bypass_netdev,
+struct net_device *child_netdev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
+ bool backup;
+
+ vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
+ backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent == bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
+ if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
+ rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
+ netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
+ "%s attempting to join bypass dev when %s already
present\n",
+ child_netdev->name, backup ? "backup" : "active");
Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
enslaved and refuse right there.
This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check has to be
done by netvsc
as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to indicate if the
driver is doing
a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check can be done in
bypass module
for 3 netdev scenario.
Just let me undestand it clearly. What I expect the difference would be
between 2netdev and3 netdev model is this:
2netdev:
bypass_master
/
/
VF_slave
3netdev:
bypass_master
/ \
/ \
VF_slave backup_slave
Is that correct? If not, how does it look like?
Looks correct.
VF_slave and backup_slave are the original netdevs and are present in both the
models.
In the 3 netdev model, bypass_master netdev is created and VF_slave and
backup_slave are
marked as the 2 slaves of this new netdev.
In the 2 netdev model, backup_slave acts as bypass_master and the bypass module
doesn't
have access to netdev_priv of the backup_slave.
Once i moved all the ndo_ops of the master netdev to bypass module, i realized
that we can
move the create/destroy of the upper netdev also to bypass.c.
That way the changes to virtio_net become very minimal.
With these updates, bypass module now supports both the models by exporting 2
sets of
functions.
3 netdev:
int bypass_master_create(struct net_device *backup_netdev,
struct bypass_master **pbypass_master);
void bypass_master_destroy(struct bypass_master *bypass_master);
2 netdev:
int bypass_master_register(struct net_device *backup_netdev, struct
bypass_ops *ops,
struct bypass_master **pbypass_master);
void bypass_master_unregister(struct bypass_master *bypass_master);
Will send the next revision in a day or two.
Thanks
Sridhar
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
[virtio-dev] Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 3/4] virtio_net: Extend virtio to use VF datapath when available
On 4/6/2018 5:48 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:08:22PM CEST, sridhar.samudr...@intel.com wrote:
+
+static void virtnet_bypass_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi = netdev_priv(dev);
+ struct net_device *child_netdev;
+
+ rcu_read_lock();
+
+ child_netdev = rcu_dereference(vbi->active_netdev);
+ if (child_netdev) {
+ dev_uc_sync_multiple(child_netdev, dev);
+ dev_mc_sync_multiple(child_netdev, dev);
+ }
+
+ child_netdev = rcu_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev);
+ if (child_netdev) {
+ dev_uc_sync_multiple(child_netdev, dev);
+ dev_mc_sync_multiple(child_netdev, dev);
+ }
+
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+}
This should be moved to bypass module.
Sure. All these bypass ndo_ops can be moved to bypass module and any
paravirtual driver that want to go with 3 netdev model can reuse these
functions.
+
+static const struct net_device_ops virtnet_bypass_netdev_ops = {
+ .ndo_open = virtnet_bypass_open,
+ .ndo_stop = virtnet_bypass_close,
+ .ndo_start_xmit = virtnet_bypass_start_xmit,
+ .ndo_select_queue = virtnet_bypass_select_queue,
+ .ndo_get_stats64= virtnet_bypass_get_stats,
+ .ndo_change_mtu = virtnet_bypass_change_mtu,
+ .ndo_set_rx_mode= virtnet_bypass_set_rx_mode,
+ .ndo_validate_addr = eth_validate_addr,
+ .ndo_features_check = passthru_features_check,
+};
+
+static int
+virtnet_bypass_ethtool_get_link_ksettings(struct net_device *dev,
+ struct ethtool_link_ksettings *cmd)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi = netdev_priv(dev);
+ struct net_device *child_netdev;
+
+ child_netdev = rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev);
+ if (!child_netdev || !virtnet_bypass_xmit_ready(child_netdev)) {
+ child_netdev = rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev);
+ if (!child_netdev || !virtnet_bypass_xmit_ready(child_netdev)) {
+ cmd->base.duplex = DUPLEX_UNKNOWN;
+ cmd->base.port = PORT_OTHER;
+ cmd->base.speed = SPEED_UNKNOWN;
+
+ return 0;
+ }
+ }
+
+ return __ethtool_get_link_ksettings(child_netdev, cmd);
+}
+
+#define BYPASS_DRV_NAME "virtnet_bypass"
+#define BYPASS_DRV_VERSION "0.1"
+
+static void virtnet_bypass_ethtool_get_drvinfo(struct net_device *dev,
+ struct ethtool_drvinfo *drvinfo)
+{
+ strlcpy(drvinfo->driver, BYPASS_DRV_NAME, sizeof(drvinfo->driver));
+ strlcpy(drvinfo->version, BYPASS_DRV_VERSION, sizeof(drvinfo->version));
+}
+
+static const struct ethtool_ops virtnet_bypass_ethtool_ops = {
+ .get_drvinfo= virtnet_bypass_ethtool_get_drvinfo,
+ .get_link = ethtool_op_get_link,
+ .get_link_ksettings = virtnet_bypass_ethtool_get_link_ksettings,
+};
+
+static int virtnet_bypass_join_child(struct net_device *bypass_netdev,
+struct net_device *child_netdev)
+{
+ struct virtnet_bypass_info *vbi;
+ bool backup;
+
+ vbi = netdev_priv(bypass_netdev);
+ backup = (child_netdev->dev.parent == bypass_netdev->dev.parent);
+ if (backup ? rtnl_dereference(vbi->backup_netdev) :
+ rtnl_dereference(vbi->active_netdev)) {
+ netdev_info(bypass_netdev,
+ "%s attempting to join bypass dev when %s already
present\n",
+ child_netdev->name, backup ? "backup" : "active");
Bypass module should check if there is already some other netdev
enslaved and refuse right there.
This will work for virtio-net with 3 netdev model, but this check has to be
done by netvsc
as its bypass_netdev is same as the backup_netdev.
Will add a flag while registering with the bypass module to indicate if the
driver is doing
a 2 netdev or 3 netdev model and based on that flag this check can be done in
bypass module
for 3 netdev scenario.
The active/backup terminology is quite confusing. From the bonding world
that means active is the one which is currently used for tx of the
packets. And it depends on link and other things what netdev is declared
active. However here, it is different. Backup is always the virtio_net
instance even when it is active. Odd. Please change the terminology.
For "active" I suggest to use name "stolen".
I am not too happy with 'stolen' name. Will see if i can come up with a
better name.
*** Also, the 2 slave netdev pointers should be stored in the bypass
module instance, not in the drivers.
Will move virtnet_bypass_info struct to bypass.h
+ return -EEXIST;
+ }
+
+ dev_hold(child_netdev);
+
+ if (backup) {
+ rcu_
