Messages in this thread | | | From | Parav Pandit <> | Subject | RE: [RFC net-next 0/8] Introducing subdev bus and devlink extension | Date | Wed, 9 Jun 2021 09:38:50 +0000 |
| |
> From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com> > Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 2:46 PM > [..]
> >> Is there any reason why VF use its own devlink instance? > > > > Primary use case for VFs is virtual environments where guest isn't > > trusted, so tying the VF to the main devlink instance, over which > > guest should have no control is counter productive. > > The security is mainly about VF using in container case, right? > Because VF using in VM, it is different host, it means a different devlink > instance for VF, so there is no security issue for VF using in VM case? > But it might not be the case for VF using in container? Devlink instance has net namespace attached to it controlled using devlink reload command. So a VF devlink instance can be assigned to a container/process running in a specific net namespace.
$ ip netns add n1 $ devlink dev reload pci/0000:06:00.4 netns n1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ PCI VF/PF/SF.
> Also, there is a "switch_id" concept from jiri's example, which seems to be > not implemented yet?
switch_id is present for switch ports in [1] and documented in [2].
[1] /sys/class/net/representor_netdev/phys_switch_id. [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt " Switch ID"
| |