Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: [virtio-comment] RE: RE: RE: RE: [RFC] virtio-net: support access and control the member devices

[Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>]

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 13:21:23 +0800, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 12:38âPM Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 10:03 AM
> >
> > > > This option because it is in use by very big and mature eco system of multiple
> > > sw stacks, kernel subsystem, drivers, and nics for several years now.
> > > >
> > > > > A drawback of using switch is that it introduces dependencies.
> > > > >
> > > > Feature is not a dependency. :)
> > >
> > > Well, I meant you need a switch in order to let the IP filter work then.
> > >
> > Ok.
> >
> > > >
> > > > > > A virtio switch object can be part of a existing virtio device or
> > > > > > a new virtio
> > > > > device type in itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Xuan,
> > > > > > As we discussed, since the owner device packets also needs to be
> > > > > > filtered, potentially outside of the owner device itself,
> > > > >
> > > > > This seems the admin request out of the scope of virtio.
> > > > >
> > > > Not really, it could be virto switch device that manage PF also.
> > > > At that point, there may be two functions, PF and switching PF, switching PF
> > > filters the traffic of the PF.
> > >
> > > That's fine. But such filtering needs to be done in a switch specific way not via
> > > the admin command/virtqueue.
> >
> > A switch object needs a generic flow filter vq(s) to meet the high rate needed.
> > Several of us have worked through the flow filter vq for few several weeks on bi-weekly basis and over public mailing lists.
> >
> > We can differ the design discussion once we have clarity on requirements. :)
>
> It can be done via flow filter or not for sure. We need more inputs on
> the requirement. Maybe a new thread is more suitable.

YES.

I will post a summary to a new thread.

Thanks.


>
> Thanks
>