Re: [Xen-devel] VF as default interface on dom0

[Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 09:20:06AM -0800, Rose, Gregory V wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel-
> >bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Simon Horman
> >Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 11:38 AM
> >To: Satish Chowdhury
> >Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VF as default interface on dom0
> >
> >On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:19:51PM +0530, Satish Chowdhury wrote:
> >> Hi Simon,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the reply and reproducing the problem.
> >>
> >> I didn't tried with pv_ops kernel yet.
> >>
> >> I guess the issue is not with the driver.  As I understand, the
> >behavior is
> >> because of the L2 filtering done by 82576 NIC.
> >>
> >> The NIC filters frames based on MAC address that are assigned to VFs.
> >In my
> >> experiment, the arp reply that reaches the NIC, has mac address of
> >interface
> >> on VM(domU). NIC's filtering based on VF MAC address fail. So, packet
> >is not
> >> queued to VF interface.  On dom0 a bridge is created, with VF and
> >domUs
> >> virtual interfaces (no PF).
> >> If we group PF interface also into this bridge, because of bridge
> >learning
> >> functionality, the packet get routed to the virtual interface and
> >finally to
> >> VM.
> >>
> >> I am not 100% sure about above understanding of mine. Please, me know
> >if you
> >> think i am wrong.
> >
> >I suspect you are right, though I was hoping that its a problem
> >that could be fixed by the driver configuring the card slightly
> >differently.
> >
> >It would probably be good to post your problem report to the
> >e1000-devel and/or netdev lists to get some more eye's on it.
> >
> >
> [Rose, Gregory V] 
> 
> I must have missed some previous email on this subject but from the context 
> here I'm guessing that you're trying to put the PF driver on a bridge so that 
> you can support some emulated connections in some VMs and some VFs in other 
> VMs?
> 
> Is that the case?

I'm unsure of the motivation but the problem is that putting a VF on
the bridge (i.e VF is pethX) doesn't seem to work correctly as some
reply packets end up on the PF instead.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel