Message ID | 20230620221854.848606-1-david.m.ertman@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Implement support for SRIOV + LAG | expand |
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 15:18:44 -0700 Dave Ertman wrote: > Implement support for SRIOV VF's on interfaces that are in an > aggregate interface. > > The first interface added into the aggregate will be flagged as > the primary interface, and this primary interface will be > responsible for managing the VF's resources. VF's created on the > primary are the only VFs that will be supported on the aggregate. > Only Active-Backup mode will be supported and only aggregates whose > primary interface is in switchdev mode will be supported. If you're CCing netdev you need to obey netdev rules: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#resending-after-review You have sent two version of this today (and there weren't even any replies).
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 7:19 PM > To: Ertman, David M <david.m.ertman@intel.com> > Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; > daniel.machon@microchip.com; simon.horman@corigine.com; > bcreeley@amd.com; Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v6 00/10] Implement support for SRIOV + LAG > > On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 15:18:44 -0700 Dave Ertman wrote: > > Implement support for SRIOV VF's on interfaces that are in an > > aggregate interface. > > > > The first interface added into the aggregate will be flagged as > > the primary interface, and this primary interface will be > > responsible for managing the VF's resources. VF's created on the > > primary are the only VFs that will be supported on the aggregate. > > Only Active-Backup mode will be supported and only aggregates whose > > primary interface is in switchdev mode will be supported. > > If you're CCing netdev you need to obey netdev rules: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer- > netdev.html#resending-after-review > > You have sent two version of this today (and there weren't even > any replies). I apologize for that! V5 was an accidental resend from the patch-set from last week, v6 is the revision after responding to the feedback over the weekend. Never try sending a patch set in the morning of coming back from a long weekend - lesson learned! DaveE