From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com (mail-pa0-f43.google.com [209.85.220.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25CE5A6C for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 20:23:49 +0100 (CET) Received: by pasz6 with SMTP id z6so99538880pas.2 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:23:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber_org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ubayCADbWL99FoF35me0nYJPvBr4SD9dSzycTvfaOF4=; b=HdM9fySf+NO2C7f29xdYAXM16VmzkzpNeDTTR0jTj65IE6IldGjlEbx0ZFDhl/qigm Gc4B1lFjAFfhLT9Hxo0rGela85Fb7zNYll05ZyQIwYD0y4gUiLY3POeFlw5UflXNPhEX iyJe42FU3maOSQG8d1wRxUoU6lITmbtIlnnSzvo6WuOu71ool8IHi3hU0vOs66Cbcmci uClqjiUvkMKSOPZngdLWMJSwO1OP7ibCnCs9PvECqXsqNRfDPhG25a9Zm9sm4JKKtx0b PdynbfXdFbNDVR86JEgda1KFQHhSksBo6YPJjRZ6P3aUJiRXt98zqrQIje8ysk5NGjYH 70yA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ubayCADbWL99FoF35me0nYJPvBr4SD9dSzycTvfaOF4=; b=Orf7UL1Q0kvp2SaK3/wVnivQ0cNfsxZ7kb+pkRZExbs1MFmzIFTu5d0sWb3uRVB5Tl fc+i8kj0EpWMTf6vM/5UDlM9bWFy6+lbycYiWQYElGT6GvGhdTCdHnwQ71K8mLz6cpao liNuc9UsnvDJ/EiDdOtoSVkxxzqcskL1RvI9/h9JO4Mt4g0qYNtWDIRDKP3w9cYLreca U3damVFQylnUXmxZDCWfd4ZfbZroMB/gS/Zr3hfPI6ztycc9y2y4reRO3EQcLbQ80MVe HEVvi+h+Ghhiq5yMFigB2OYdF68WrFi5VTMN0tRQF/RAtGOAAynVY9jvftdjnzGEpxHv KevA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmXnk0Za2JF3T+sKjSBtv2Bzmw8buzVGTYwN6Ft1NMg/2kIjez3n1BIXPSCbA6M7JCJEnMO X-Received: by 10.66.234.194 with SMTP id ug2mr11789658pac.122.1446751428947; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:23:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from xeon-e3 (static-50-53-82-155.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net. [50.53.82.155]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v13sm9316442pbs.51.2015.11.05.11.23.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:23:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 11:23:58 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: "Charles (Chas) Williams" <3chas3@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20151105112358.6cec995f@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <1446741544.1777.3.camel@gmail.com> References: <1443798007-20122-1-git-send-email-3chas3@gmail.com> <561CFDDB.90601@6wind.com> <1444830094.3494.59.camel@gmail.com> <7145730.ihAL5VqqiH@xps13> <1446741544.1777.3.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] devargs: add blacklisting by linux interface name X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 19:23:50 -0000 On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:39:04 -0500 "Charles (Chas) Williams" <3chas3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2015-11-04 at 23:40 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2015-10-14 09:41, Charles Williams: > > > On Tue, 2015-10-13 at 14:49 +0200, Olivier MATZ wrote: > > > > For PCI devices that have several interfaces (I think it's the case for > > > > some Mellanox boards), maybe we should not store the interface name? > > > > > > I am not sure what you mean here. If a device has multiple ethernet > > > interfaces, then it should a have seperate PCI device address space for > > > each interface (I dont know of any DPDK drivers that don't make this > > > assumption as well). > > > > mlx4 and cxgbe? > > OK, I see now. I don't know of a way to tell if a device has multiple > ports just from the pci vendor/device id without maintaining some > sort of table. > > Do these devices have multiple interfaces listed in their > /sys/devices/.../net diretory? If so, matching one of the listed > interfaces can just blacklist the whole device similar to blacklisting > by the device id. Devices with multiple ports are supposed to report the port via /sys/class/net/xxx/portid But you aren't going to be able to blacklist only one port of these devices. The two drivers would be fighting over registers and IRQ management. Plus kernel bind/unbind is by PCI id.