search for: vf0

...599 I follow a document from intel guy, it said that I should write xml like below: ============================ <network> <name>macvtap_passthrough’</name> <forward mode=’passthrough> <interface dev=’vf0’ /> <interface dev=’vf1’ /> .. .. </forward> </network> ============================ I guess here the vf0 & vf1 should be the VFs of Intel 82599. What make me confused is that we know...

...now we only have >a single bit so the goal for now is trying to keep this as simple as >possible. I have another usecase that would require the solution to be different then what you suggest. Consider following scenario: - baremetal has 2 sr-iov nics - there is a vm, has 1 VF from each nics: vf0, vf1. No virtio_net - baremetal would like to somehow tell the VM to bond vf0 and vf1 together and how this bonding should be configured, according to how the VF representors are configured on the baremetal (LACP for example) The baremetal could decide to remove any VF during the VM runtime, i...

...e bit so the goal for now is trying to keep this as simple as >>possible. > > I have another usecase that would require the solution to be different > then what you suggest. Consider following scenario: > - baremetal has 2 sr-iov nics > - there is a vm, has 1 VF from each nics: vf0, vf1. No virtio_net > - baremetal would like to somehow tell the VM to bond vf0 and vf1 > together and how this bonding should be configured, according to how > the VF representors are configured on the baremetal (LACP for example) > > The baremetal could decide to remove any VF...

...e bit so the goal for now is trying to keep this as simple as >>possible. > > I have another usecase that would require the solution to be different > then what you suggest. Consider following scenario: > - baremetal has 2 sr-iov nics > - there is a vm, has 1 VF from each nics: vf0, vf1. No virtio_net > - baremetal would like to somehow tell the VM to bond vf0 and vf1 > together and how this bonding should be configured, according to how > the VF representors are configured on the baremetal (LACP for example) > > The baremetal could decide to remove any VF...

...VBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAABMAAAATCAYAAAByUDbMAAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAARnQU1BAACx jwv8YQUAAAAJcEhZcwAADsEAAA7BAbiRa+0AAAOmSURBVDhPhZQPSJx1GMefGl2tJCIwxhwSo40o iKBi4YTcFkStoBZNHdZglUs2VmtLrauV/cG4FltzGLakmCV3TtS0TcWxO7wSbtrW1tLd1ro5lXM7 552eU1+vu0/P+54Gm0o/eODH73nfL9/n+3yfR2SOc80laaM/ij1SJZ7h76R/6FthsEL6g/vF0/+V 2C99KWlz/XfdGzViizrFMeqU8QnfE8T+3kQ8uBXCbxLvzSZ2KoOxpkX0OmT8wmfiOPOh2OYEHXVJ atQlPqNrDUyUw+R+GP8Coh/ByE4Y2gxXcuBSJomee4lW2+j5QHzn3pXU2YwUaOrPdXTu20DLlnQr Tn6TTyL6sYIVEr/yxqzcpEs4vUN81zHU0kqNE2vpqcnlbN2nTISDVnQ77fz101oFK6Kn6rHZuQNC +Guhs0BKLXaW2E4xiDlpLkjDiF5l5kxc7bcYMlo0f+5XBcsXw/uypMtItZRM/vY8J...

...9;` > >> + > >> + # Enable vDPA VF auxiliary device(s) in the PF > >> + devlink dev param set pci/$PF_BDF name enable_vnet value true cmode runtime > >> + > > > > Does this mean we can't do per VF configuration for vDPA enablement > > (e.g VF0 for vdpa VF1 to other type)? > > For now, yes, a PF only supports one VF type at a time. We've thought > about possibilities for some heterogeneous configurations, and tried to > do some planning for future flexibility, but our current needs don't go > that far. If and when...

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:42 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri at resnulli.us> wrote: > Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 07:11:19PM CET, sridhar.samudrala at intel.com wrote: >>Patch 1 introduces a new feature bit VIRTIO_NET_F_BACKUP that can be >>used by hypervisor to indicate that virtio_net interface should act as >>a backup for another device with the same MAC address. >>

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:42 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri at resnulli.us> wrote: > Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 07:11:19PM CET, sridhar.samudrala at intel.com wrote: >>Patch 1 introduces a new feature bit VIRTIO_NET_F_BACKUP that can be >>used by hypervisor to indicate that virtio_net interface should act as >>a backup for another device with the same MAC address. >>