linux/include/net/switchdev.h

402 lines
10 KiB

2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
switchdev: Add SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_ADD, SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_DEL An offloading driver may need to have access to switchdev events on ports that aren't directly under its control. An example is a VXLAN port attached to a bridge offloaded by a driver. The driver needs to know about VLANs configured on the VXLAN device. However the VXLAN device isn't stashed between the bridge and a front-panel-port device (such as is the case e.g. for LAG devices), so the usual switchdev ops don't reach the driver. VXLAN is likely not the only device type like this: in theory any L2 tunnel device that needs offloading will prompt requirement of this sort. This falsifies the assumption that only the lower devices of a front panel port need to be notified to achieve flawless offloading. A way to fix this is to give up the notion of port object addition / deletion as a switchdev operation, which assumes somewhat tight coupling between the message producer and consumer. And instead send the message over a notifier chain. To that end, introduce two new switchdev notifier types, SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_ADD and SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_DEL. These notifier types communicate the same event as the corresponding switchdev op, except in a form of a notification. struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info was added to carry the fields that the switchdev op carries. An additional field, handled, will be used to communicate back to switchdev that the event has reached an interested party, which will be important for the two-phase commit. The two switchdev operations themselves are kept in place. Following patches first convert individual clients to the notifier protocol, and only then are the operations removed. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Acked-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:28:38 +00:00
switchdev: Add SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_ADD, SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_DEL An offloading driver may need to have access to switchdev events on ports that aren't directly under its control. An example is a VXLAN port attached to a bridge offloaded by a driver. The driver needs to know about VLANs configured on the VXLAN device. However the VXLAN device isn't stashed between the bridge and a front-panel-port device (such as is the case e.g. for LAG devices), so the usual switchdev ops don't reach the driver. VXLAN is likely not the only device type like this: in theory any L2 tunnel device that needs offloading will prompt requirement of this sort. This falsifies the assumption that only the lower devices of a front panel port need to be notified to achieve flawless offloading. A way to fix this is to give up the notion of port object addition / deletion as a switchdev operation, which assumes somewhat tight coupling between the message producer and consumer. And instead send the message over a notifier chain. To that end, introduce two new switchdev notifier types, SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_ADD and SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_DEL. These notifier types communicate the same event as the corresponding switchdev op, except in a form of a notification. struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info was added to carry the fields that the switchdev op carries. An additional field, handled, will be used to communicate back to switchdev that the event has reached an interested party, which will be important for the two-phase commit. The two switchdev operations themselves are kept in place. Following patches first convert individual clients to the notifier protocol, and only then are the operations removed. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Acked-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:28:38 +00:00
switchdev: Add SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_ADD, SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_DEL An offloading driver may need to have access to switchdev events on ports that aren't directly under its control. An example is a VXLAN port attached to a bridge offloaded by a driver. The driver needs to know about VLANs configured on the VXLAN device. However the VXLAN device isn't stashed between the bridge and a front-panel-port device (such as is the case e.g. for LAG devices), so the usual switchdev ops don't reach the driver. VXLAN is likely not the only device type like this: in theory any L2 tunnel device that needs offloading will prompt requirement of this sort. This falsifies the assumption that only the lower devices of a front panel port need to be notified to achieve flawless offloading. A way to fix this is to give up the notion of port object addition / deletion as a switchdev operation, which assumes somewhat tight coupling between the message producer and consumer. And instead send the message over a notifier chain. To that end, introduce two new switchdev notifier types, SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_ADD and SWITCHDEV_PORT_OBJ_DEL. These notifier types communicate the same event as the corresponding switchdev op, except in a form of a notification. struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info was added to carry the fields that the switchdev op carries. An additional field, handled, will be used to communicate back to switchdev that the event has reached an interested party, which will be important for the two-phase commit. The two switchdev operations themselves are kept in place. Following patches first convert individual clients to the notifier protocol, and only then are the operations removed. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Acked-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:28:38 +00:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
switchdev: Add helpers to aid traversal through lower devices After the transition from switchdev operations to notifier chain (which will take place in following patches), the onus is on the driver to find its own devices below possible layer of LAG or other uppers. The logic to do so is fairly repetitive: each driver is looking for its own devices among the lowers of the notified device. For those that it finds, it calls a handler. To indicate that the event was handled, struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info.handled is set. The differences lie only in what constitutes an "own" device and what handler to call. Therefore abstract this logic into two helpers, switchdev_handle_port_obj_add() and switchdev_handle_port_obj_del(). If a driver only supports physical ports under a bridge device, it will simply avoid this layer of indirection. One area where this helper diverges from the current switchdev behavior is the case of mixed lowers, some of which are switchdev ports and some of which are not. Previously, such scenario would fail with -EOPNOTSUPP. The helper could do that for lowers for which the passed-in predicate doesn't hold. That would however break the case that switchdev ports from several different drivers are stashed under one master, a scenario that switchdev currently happily supports. Therefore tolerate any and all unknown netdevices, whether they are backed by a switchdev driver or not. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:29:44 +00:00
switchdev: Add helpers to aid traversal through lower devices After the transition from switchdev operations to notifier chain (which will take place in following patches), the onus is on the driver to find its own devices below possible layer of LAG or other uppers. The logic to do so is fairly repetitive: each driver is looking for its own devices among the lowers of the notified device. For those that it finds, it calls a handler. To indicate that the event was handled, struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info.handled is set. The differences lie only in what constitutes an "own" device and what handler to call. Therefore abstract this logic into two helpers, switchdev_handle_port_obj_add() and switchdev_handle_port_obj_del(). If a driver only supports physical ports under a bridge device, it will simply avoid this layer of indirection. One area where this helper diverges from the current switchdev behavior is the case of mixed lowers, some of which are switchdev ports and some of which are not. Previously, such scenario would fail with -EOPNOTSUPP. The helper could do that for lowers for which the passed-in predicate doesn't hold. That would however break the case that switchdev ports from several different drivers are stashed under one master, a scenario that switchdev currently happily supports. Therefore tolerate any and all unknown netdevices, whether they are backed by a switchdev driver or not. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:29:44 +00:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
2015-05-10 09:47:48 -07:00
switchdev: Add helpers to aid traversal through lower devices After the transition from switchdev operations to notifier chain (which will take place in following patches), the onus is on the driver to find its own devices below possible layer of LAG or other uppers. The logic to do so is fairly repetitive: each driver is looking for its own devices among the lowers of the notified device. For those that it finds, it calls a handler. To indicate that the event was handled, struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info.handled is set. The differences lie only in what constitutes an "own" device and what handler to call. Therefore abstract this logic into two helpers, switchdev_handle_port_obj_add() and switchdev_handle_port_obj_del(). If a driver only supports physical ports under a bridge device, it will simply avoid this layer of indirection. One area where this helper diverges from the current switchdev behavior is the case of mixed lowers, some of which are switchdev ports and some of which are not. Previously, such scenario would fail with -EOPNOTSUPP. The helper could do that for lowers for which the passed-in predicate doesn't hold. That would however break the case that switchdev ports from several different drivers are stashed under one master, a scenario that switchdev currently happily supports. Therefore tolerate any and all unknown netdevices, whether they are backed by a switchdev driver or not. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:29:44 +00:00
switchdev: Add helpers to aid traversal through lower devices After the transition from switchdev operations to notifier chain (which will take place in following patches), the onus is on the driver to find its own devices below possible layer of LAG or other uppers. The logic to do so is fairly repetitive: each driver is looking for its own devices among the lowers of the notified device. For those that it finds, it calls a handler. To indicate that the event was handled, struct switchdev_notifier_port_obj_info.handled is set. The differences lie only in what constitutes an "own" device and what handler to call. Therefore abstract this logic into two helpers, switchdev_handle_port_obj_add() and switchdev_handle_port_obj_del(). If a driver only supports physical ports under a bridge device, it will simply avoid this layer of indirection. One area where this helper diverges from the current switchdev behavior is the case of mixed lowers, some of which are switchdev ports and some of which are not. Previously, such scenario would fail with -EOPNOTSUPP. The helper could do that for lowers for which the passed-in predicate doesn't hold. That would however break the case that switchdev ports from several different drivers are stashed under one master, a scenario that switchdev currently happily supports. Therefore tolerate any and all unknown netdevices, whether they are backed by a switchdev driver or not. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2018-11-22 23:29:44 +00:00