On 1/21/2021 7:31 PM, Parav Pandit wrote: > > >> From: Samudrala, Sridhar <sridhar.samudrala@xxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 2:21 AM >> >>> $ devlink port show >>> pci/0000:06:00.0/65535: type eth netdev ens2f0np0 flavour physical >>> port 0 splittable false >>> >>> $ devlink port add pci/0000:06:00.0 flavour pcisf pfnum 0 sfnum 88 >> >> Do we need to specify pfnum when adding a SF port? Isn't this redundant? >> Isn't there a 1:1 mapping between the pci device and a pfnum? >> > No. it's not entirely redundant. > Currently in most cases today it is same function number as that of PCI device. > Netronome has one devlink instance that represents multiple PCI devices. I am curious how this is done. I looked at doing this for ice but it became incredibly problematic because of interacting across multiple PCIe drivers.. Hmm. I'll have to go look at how this is handled in the netronome driver. Thanks, Jake
