qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] add failover feature for assigned network d


From: Laine Stump
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] add failover feature for assigned network devices
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 14:18:19 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

On 6/3/19 2:12 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 02:06:47PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
On 5/28/19 10:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:14:22PM -0700, si-wei liu wrote:


On 5/21/2019 11:49 AM, Jens Freimann wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 07:37:19AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 09:21:57AM +0200, Jens Freimann wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 04:56:57PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:

Actually is there a list of devices for which this has been tested
besides mlx5? I think someone said some old intel cards
don't support this well, we might need to blacklist these ...

So far I've tested mlx5 and XL710 which both worked, but I'm
working on testing with more devices. But of course help with testing
is greatly appreciated.

It won't work on Intel ixgbe and Broadcom bnxt_en, which requires toggling
the state of tap backing the virtio-net in order to release/reprogram MAC
filter. Actually, it's very few NICs that could work with this - even some
works by chance the behavior is undefined. Instead of blacklisting it makes
more sense to whitelist the NIC that supports it - with some new sysfs
attribute claiming the support presumably.

-Siwei

I agree for many cards we won't know how they behave until we try.  One
can consider this a bug in Linux that cards don't behave in a consistent
way.  The best thing to do IMHO would be to write a tool that people can
run to test the behaviour.

Is the "bad behavior" something due to the hardware of the cards, or their
drivers? If it's the latter, then at least initially having a whitelist
would be counterproductive, since it would make it difficult for relative
outsiders to test and report success/failure of various cards.

We can add an "ignore whitelist" flag. Would that address the issue?

It would be better than requiring a kernel/qemu recompile :-)


Where would the whilelist live? In qemu or in the kernel? It would be problematic to have the whitelist in qemu if kernel driver changes could fix a particular card.

Beyond that, what about *always* just issuing some sort of warning rather than completely forbidding a card that wasn't whitelisted? (Haven't decided if I like that better or not (and it probably doesn't matter, since I'm not a "real" user, but I thought I would mention it).



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]