[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [libvirt PATCH] Port-profile ID support using IFLA_VF_PORT_PROFILE netlink msg



On 5/10/10 11:57 AM, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb us ibm com> wrote:

> libvir-list-bounces redhat com wrote on 05/10/2010 02:35:49 PM:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Correct, IFLA_VF_PORT_PROFILE is not in the kernel yet.  The kernel
>> patch is be discussed on the kernel netdev mailing list.  The most recent
>> discussion is on ways to merge VDP and CDCP into what I've posted for
>> IFLA_VF_PORT_PROFILE.
>> 
>> I'll send out another libvirt patch once the kernel discussions are
>> final.
> 
> I suppose you will provide the libvirt patch only for what seems to be
> Cisco technology support.

I can only test with our production equipment setup, so I'm hesitant to
include additions to the patch for VDP/CDCP which I can't test.

> Now the slight differences in technology
> that we seem to try to support here are reflected in the parameters that
> go into the XML and end up in the netlink messages. Any way to
> consolidate that?

I doesn't appear we'll be able to consolidate the parameters between the two
technologies based on what I've seen from Arnd's latest patch on the kernel
mailing list.  The latest proposal is to define a single netlink msg that
can handle two disjoint sets of parameters.  If there is no way for further
consolidation, it probably makes more senses to have two different netlink
msgs, one for each parameter set.

-scott


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]