[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-virtualization
Subject:    RE: [RFC net-next PATCH 3/4] ethtool: Add new set commands
From:       "Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose () intel ! com>
Date:       2011-07-28 22:04:22
Message-ID: 43F901BD926A4E43B106BF17856F0755019414D95C () orsmsx508 ! amr ! corp ! intel ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org]
> On Behalf Of Anirban Chakraborty
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 3:01 PM
> To: Rose, Gregory V
> Cc: David Miller; netdev; Ben Hutchings; Kirsher, Jeffrey T;
> virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC net-next PATCH 3/4] ethtool: Add new set commands
> 
> 
> On Jul 28, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Rose, Gregory V wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > From: Anirban Chakraborty [mailto:anirban.chakraborty@qlogic.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 12:04 PM
> > > To: Rose, Gregory V
> > > Cc: David Miller; netdev; Ben Hutchings; Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> > > Subject: Re: [RFC net-next PATCH 3/4] ethtool: Add new set commands
> > > 
> > > 
> > > If I understood it correctly, you are trying to set/unset spoofing on
> per
> > > eth interface,  which could be a PF on the hypervisor or a pci
> passthru-ed
> > > VF in the linux guest.  There are other security features that one
> could set
> > > for a port on the VF (lets call it vport),  e.g. setting a port VLAN ID
> for
> > > a VF and specifying if the VF (VM) is allowed to send tagged/untagged
> > > packets, setting a vport in port mirroring mode so that the PF can
> monitor
> > > the traffic on a VF,  setting a vport in promiscuous mode etc.
> > > 
> > > Does it make sense to try to use ip link util to specify all these
> parameters,
> > > since ip link already does the  job of setting VF properties and VF
> port
> > > profile?
> > > 
> > > Any thoughts?
> > > 
> > 
> > Sure, that's a possibility too.  I was considering ethtool for this
> since MAC addresses and VLANs are fairly specific to Ethernet whereas
> netlink might apply to other types of physical networks.  At least that's
> my understanding.
> 
> You could specify VF MAC and VLANs using netlink today.
> e.g. ip link set ethX vf # mac, vlan etc.
> Adding spoofing as follows would do it.
> ip link set ethX vf # spoof on|off
> 
> Having SR-IOV features scattered among ethtool and ip link may be
> inconvenient for the end users.
> CC-ing virtualization list.
> 
> > 
> > However, I have no strong feelings about it and if community consensus
> is to use ip link instead then that's fine by me.
> > 
> > Of course, patches implementing such would be quite welcome also.
> 
> I could take a stab at it at the netlink side, if there is a consensus.

Now that I think about it I'm seeing it more your way.  I'll drop the anti-spoofing \
stuff from my ethtool patches.  If you get the time to provide patches to netlink for \
anti-spoofing then that's great, otherwise I'll do it when I get done with the SR-IOV \
reconfig stuff.

Thanks,

- Greg

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]