Searched hist:"11 a45def" (Results 1 – 5 of 5) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/steering/ |
| H A D | dr_ste_v0.c | 11a45def Thu Sep 09 09:32:46 CDT 2021 Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com> net/mlx5: DR, Add support for SF vports
Move all the vport capabilities to a separate struct and store vport caps
in XArray: SFs vport numbers will not come in the same range as VF vports,
so the existing implementation of vport capabilities as a fixed size array
is not suitable here.
XArray is a perfect fit: it is efficient when the indices used are densely
clustered. In addition to being a perfect fit as a dynamic data structure,
XArray also provides locking - it uses RCU and an internal spinlock to
synchronise access, so no additional protection needed.
Now except for the eswitch manager vport, all other vports (including the
uplink vport) are handled in the same way: when a new go-to-vport action
is added, this vport's caps are loaded from the xarray. If it is the first
time for this particular vport number, then its capabilities are queried
from FW and filled in into the appropriate entry.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Sammar <muhammads@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
| H A D | dr_ste_v1.c | 11a45def Thu Sep 09 09:32:46 CDT 2021 Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com> net/mlx5: DR, Add support for SF vports
Move all the vport capabilities to a separate struct and store vport caps
in XArray: SFs vport numbers will not come in the same range as VF vports,
so the existing implementation of vport capabilities as a fixed size array
is not suitable here.
XArray is a perfect fit: it is efficient when the indices used are densely
clustered. In addition to being a perfect fit as a dynamic data structure,
XArray also provides locking - it uses RCU and an internal spinlock to
synchronise access, so no additional protection needed.
Now except for the eswitch manager vport, all other vports (including the
uplink vport) are handled in the same way: when a new go-to-vport action
is added, this vport's caps are loaded from the xarray. If it is the first
time for this particular vport number, then its capabilities are queried
from FW and filled in into the appropriate entry.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Sammar <muhammads@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
| H A D | dr_domain.c | 11a45def Thu Sep 09 09:32:46 CDT 2021 Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com> net/mlx5: DR, Add support for SF vports
Move all the vport capabilities to a separate struct and store vport caps
in XArray: SFs vport numbers will not come in the same range as VF vports,
so the existing implementation of vport capabilities as a fixed size array
is not suitable here.
XArray is a perfect fit: it is efficient when the indices used are densely
clustered. In addition to being a perfect fit as a dynamic data structure,
XArray also provides locking - it uses RCU and an internal spinlock to
synchronise access, so no additional protection needed.
Now except for the eswitch manager vport, all other vports (including the
uplink vport) are handled in the same way: when a new go-to-vport action
is added, this vport's caps are loaded from the xarray. If it is the first
time for this particular vport number, then its capabilities are queried
from FW and filled in into the appropriate entry.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Sammar <muhammads@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
| H A D | dr_action.c | 11a45def Thu Sep 09 09:32:46 CDT 2021 Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com> net/mlx5: DR, Add support for SF vports
Move all the vport capabilities to a separate struct and store vport caps
in XArray: SFs vport numbers will not come in the same range as VF vports,
so the existing implementation of vport capabilities as a fixed size array
is not suitable here.
XArray is a perfect fit: it is efficient when the indices used are densely
clustered. In addition to being a perfect fit as a dynamic data structure,
XArray also provides locking - it uses RCU and an internal spinlock to
synchronise access, so no additional protection needed.
Now except for the eswitch manager vport, all other vports (including the
uplink vport) are handled in the same way: when a new go-to-vport action
is added, this vport's caps are loaded from the xarray. If it is the first
time for this particular vport number, then its capabilities are queried
from FW and filled in into the appropriate entry.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Sammar <muhammads@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
| H A D | dr_types.h | 11a45def Thu Sep 09 09:32:46 CDT 2021 Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com> net/mlx5: DR, Add support for SF vports
Move all the vport capabilities to a separate struct and store vport caps
in XArray: SFs vport numbers will not come in the same range as VF vports,
so the existing implementation of vport capabilities as a fixed size array
is not suitable here.
XArray is a perfect fit: it is efficient when the indices used are densely
clustered. In addition to being a perfect fit as a dynamic data structure,
XArray also provides locking - it uses RCU and an internal spinlock to
synchronise access, so no additional protection needed.
Now except for the eswitch manager vport, all other vports (including the
uplink vport) are handled in the same way: when a new go-to-vport action
is added, this vport's caps are loaded from the xarray. If it is the first
time for this particular vport number, then its capabilities are queried
from FW and filled in into the appropriate entry.
Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Muhammad Sammar <muhammads@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|