On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 08:30:24AM -0800, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
On 11/17/11 4:15 PM, "Ben Hutchings" [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Sorry to come to this rather late.
On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 23:55 -0800, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
[...]
quoted
v2 -> v3
- Moved set and get filter ops from rtnl_link_ops to netdev_ops
- Support for SRIOV VFs.
[Note: The get filters msg (in the way current get rtnetlink handles
it) might get too big for SRIOV vfs. This patch follows existing
sriov
vf get code and tries to accomodate filters for all VF's in a PF.
And for the SRIOV case I have only tested the fact that the VF
arguments are getting delivered to rtnetlink correctly. The code
follows existing sriov vf handling code so rest of it should work
fine]
[...]
This is already broken for large numbers of VFs, and increasing the
amount of information per VF is going to make the situation worse. I am
no netlink expert but I think that the current approach of bundling all
information about an interface in a single message may not be
sustainable.
Yes agreed. I have the same concern.
So it seems that we need to extend the existing interface to allow
tweaking filters per VF. Does it need to block this
patchset though? After all, we'll need to support the existing
interface indefinitely, too.
--
MST