search for: netif_r_gso_robust

...t(dev, vf_netdev, skb); > + A question here. If I read the code correctly, all features were validated against virtio instead VF before transmitting. This assumes VF's feature is a superset of virtio, does this really work? Do we need to sanitize the feature before joining? (e.g at last NETIF_R_GSO_ROBUST needs to be removed). Thanks

...t(dev, vf_netdev, skb); > + A question here. If I read the code correctly, all features were validated against virtio instead VF before transmitting. This assumes VF's feature is a superset of virtio, does this really work? Do we need to sanitize the feature before joining? (e.g at last NETIF_R_GSO_ROBUST needs to be removed). Thanks

...t; > A question here. > > If I read the code correctly, all features were validated against > virtio instead VF before transmitting. This assumes VF's feature is a > superset of virtio, does this really work? Do we need to sanitize the > feature before joining? (e.g at last NETIF_R_GSO_ROBUST needs to be > removed). Actually, virtnet_vf_xmit() calls dev_queue_xmit() after updating skb->dev to vf netdev. So the features get validated against VF features and the right tx queue is selected before the real transmit. Thanks Sridhar

This patch series extends virtio_net to take over VF datapath by simulating a transparent bond without creating any additional netdev. I understand that there are some comments suggesting an alternate model that is based on 3 driver model(virtio_net, VF driver, a new driver virt_bond that acts as a master to virtio_net and VF). Would like to get some feedback on the right way to solve the live