search for: rx_handler

...vice.h > index 03ed492c4e14..0f4ba52b641d 100644 > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h > @@ -1421,6 +1421,8 @@ struct net_device_ops { > * entity (i.e. the master device for bridged veth) > * @IFF_MACSEC: device is a MACsec device > * @IFF_NO_RX_HANDLER: device doesn't support the rx_handler hook > + * @IFF_FAILOVER: device is a failover master device > + * @IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE: device is lower dev of a failover master device > */ > enum netdev_priv_flags { > IFF_802_1Q_VLAN = 1<<0, > @@ -1450,6 +1452,8 @@ enum ne...

...vice.h > index 03ed492c4e14..0f4ba52b641d 100644 > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h > @@ -1421,6 +1421,8 @@ struct net_device_ops { > * entity (i.e. the master device for bridged veth) > * @IFF_MACSEC: device is a MACsec device > * @IFF_NO_RX_HANDLER: device doesn't support the rx_handler hook > + * @IFF_FAILOVER: device is a failover master device > + * @IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE: device is lower dev of a failover master device > */ > enum netdev_priv_flags { > IFF_802_1Q_VLAN = 1<<0, > @@ -1450,6 +1452,8 @@ enum ne...

...gt;> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +/* Called when child dev is injecting data into network stack. >> + * Change the associated network device from lower dev to virtio. >> + * note: already called with rcu_read_lock >> + */ >> +static rx_handler_result_t virtnet_bypass_handle_frame(struct sk_buff **pskb) >> +{ >> + struct sk_buff *skb = *pskb; >> + struct net_device *ndev = rcu_dereference(skb->dev->rx_handler_data); >> + >> + skb->dev = ndev; >> + >> + return RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER; >>...

hi,all each port of bridge, has its packets process function called br_handle_frame. i want to know before this function called who and how it get the packets? if it is a real physical ethernet, it must be its driver, but for virtual ethernet , what is the driver? thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

hi,all each port of bridge, has its packets process function called br_handle_frame. i want to know before this function called who and how it get the packets? if it is a real physical ethernet, it must be its driver, but for virtual ethernet , what is the driver? thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

hi,all each port of bridge, has its packets process function called br_handle_frame. i want to know before this function called who and how it get the packets? if it is a real physical ethernet, it must be its driver, but for virtual ethernet , what is the driver? thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...>> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > >> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h > >> @@ -1421,6 +1421,8 @@ struct net_device_ops { > >> * entity (i.e. the master device for bridged veth) > >> * @IFF_MACSEC: device is a MACsec device > >> * @IFF_NO_RX_HANDLER: device doesn't support the rx_handler hook > >> + * @IFF_FAILOVER: device is a failover master device > >> + * @IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE: device is lower dev of a failover master device > >> */ > >> enum netdev_priv_flags { > >> IFF_802_1Q_VLAN...

...; / \ >VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original) That does not make sense. 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original netdev is a master of the VF 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to move the configuration to the new master device. This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both netvsc and virtio_net.

...; / \ >VF_slave virtio_net netdev (original) That does not make sense. 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original netdev is a master of the VF 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to move the configuration to the new master device. This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both netvsc and virtio_net.

...>+ netif_tx_stop_all_queues(bypass_netdev); >+ } >+ >+ return 0; >+} >+ >+/* Called when child dev is injecting data into network stack. >+ * Change the associated network device from lower dev to virtio. >+ * note: already called with rcu_read_lock >+ */ >+static rx_handler_result_t virtnet_bypass_handle_frame(struct sk_buff **pskb) >+{ >+ struct sk_buff *skb = *pskb; >+ struct net_device *ndev = rcu_dereference(skb->dev->rx_handler_data); >+ >+ skb->dev = ndev; >+ >+ return RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER; >+} Hmm, you have the rx_handler defined...

...>+ netif_tx_stop_all_queues(bypass_netdev); >+ } >+ >+ return 0; >+} >+ >+/* Called when child dev is injecting data into network stack. >+ * Change the associated network device from lower dev to virtio. >+ * note: already called with rcu_read_lock >+ */ >+static rx_handler_result_t virtnet_bypass_handle_frame(struct sk_buff **pskb) >+{ >+ struct sk_buff *skb = *pskb; >+ struct net_device *ndev = rcu_dereference(skb->dev->rx_handler_data); >+ >+ skb->dev = ndev; >+ >+ return RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER; >+} Hmm, you have the rx_handler defined...

...the host side and can pass buffers from guest to host and back using virtio. My immediate problem is how to have the host-side tx kick handler get the host-side rx kick handler to run in order to deliver a frame? In the tx kick handler I copy the frame into a queue for the receiving guest. In the rx_handler I take queued frames and copy them into the rx buffers and wake the guest. The problem is that if no frames are ready for delivery when the guest rx kick handler runs then it has to exit and somehow I have to arrange that it runs again (in the receiver's process context) when there are frames t...

...the host side and can pass buffers from guest to host and back using virtio. My immediate problem is how to have the host-side tx kick handler get the host-side rx kick handler to run in order to deliver a frame? In the tx kick handler I copy the frame into a queue for the receiving guest. In the rx_handler I take queued frames and copy them into the rx buffers and wake the guest. The problem is that if no frames are ready for delivery when the guest rx kick handler runs then it has to exit and somehow I have to arrange that it runs again (in the receiver's process context) when there are frames t...

...v (original) >> That does not make sense. >> 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original >> netdev is a master of the VF >> 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address >> configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every >> incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to >> move the configuration to the new master device. >> This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both >> netvsc and virtio_net. >Forgot to mention...

...v (original) >> That does not make sense. >> 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original >> netdev is a master of the VF >> 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address >> configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every >> incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to >> move the configuration to the new master device. >> This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both >> netvsc and virtio_net. >Forgot to mention...

...ense. >> > > 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original >> > > netdev is a master of the VF >> > > 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address >> > > configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every >> > > incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to >> > > move the configuration to the new master device. >> > > This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both >> > > net...

...ense. >> > > 1) You diverge from the behaviour of the netvsc, where the original >> > > netdev is a master of the VF >> > > 2) If the original netdev is a slave, you cannot have any IP address >> > > configured on it (well you could, but the rx_handler would eat every >> > > incoming packet). So you will break the user bacause he would have to >> > > move the configuration to the new master device. >> > > This only makes sense that the original netdev becomes the master for both >> > > net...

...les changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h > index 857f8ab..6d9e4e0 100644 > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h > @@ -1487,6 +1487,7 @@ struct net_device_ops { > * @IFF_NO_RX_HANDLER: device doesn't support the rx_handler hook > * @IFF_FAILOVER: device is a failover master device > * @IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE: device is lower dev of a failover master device > + * @IFF_SLAVE_RENAME_OK: rename is allowed while slave device is running > */ > enum netdev_priv_fl...

...les changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h > index 857f8ab..6d9e4e0 100644 > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h > @@ -1487,6 +1487,7 @@ struct net_device_ops { > * @IFF_NO_RX_HANDLER: device doesn't support the rx_handler hook > * @IFF_FAILOVER: device is a failover master device > * @IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE: device is lower dev of a failover master device > + * @IFF_SLAVE_RENAME_OK: rename is allowed while slave device is running > */ > enum netdev_priv_fl...

...generic >>>>>>> failover infrastructure. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala at intel.com> >>>>>> In previous patchset versions, the common code did >>>>>> netdev_rx_handler_register() and netdev_upper_dev_link() etc >>>>>> (netvsc_vf_join()). Now, this is still done in netvsc. Why? >>>>>> >>>>>> This should be part of the common "failover" code. >>>> Based on Stephen's feedback on earlier...