From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 13 18:55:14 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0C510656DC for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:55:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yx0-f182.google.com (mail-yx0-f182.google.com [209.85.213.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F1798FC1F for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yxh35 with SMTP id 35so843276yxh.13 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:55:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=LGnIMMAMfcThsMy7vgnGf/DI7ksGikWSLpyLOLtP28c=; b=skmehKtv/28YVvpMoswF+B5HQMvfWb2vqBVsybXjIddNo1Bq3ODCSI9DxciFBPphHa Ie0nUM66RIXh7kPvezT6VwDW7EofIpq3Dd6GsqXyO45xih+307wXBWBWvfgO8SFbHeOH tamOQWhO7u0DTTRXkxfB81o5m9DYWb9YEIEUM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=R8+EOFlaZuiovEaIqBC52EyqViOqfuJ/SZE5k6RoBertjTpde4nIFg/x5/6et290jm dXCKFz4IFQ/ktAZ3iqgMwq9y3yrXGQaD4+IAbsk/xGJipSPOdju0FtoFew1mhTthW03l qPwjF4rUeiZVubAi8iGl7pxnAIGu94o8WpEzM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.151.149.13 with SMTP id b13mr36148ybo.16.1294943179083; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:26:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.147.182.20 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:26:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4D2F1E40.1030604@gmx.com> References: <4D2F1E40.1030604@gmx.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:26:19 -0800 Message-ID: From: Jack Vogel To: Nikos Vassiliadis X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:05:10 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Jack F Vogel , Ryan Stone , freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Would there be interest in virtualization of the ixgbe driver? X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:55:14 -0000 While it seems interesting in theory, from what Ryan has told me it would require massive change to the code base, which I do not think is worthwhile without significant demand. This ability could be provided with SRIOV host support, which I would rather see. I'm still willing to look at changes and decide then if Ryan wishes. Jack On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: > On 1/5/2011 12:50 AM, Ryan Stone wrote: > >> The way that I envision this working is that you'd run something like >> "ifconfig vix0 create parent ix1" to create a new virtual interface >> sharing the same physical interface as ix1. From that point on, vix0 >> would be a completely different interface from ix1, with its own MAC, >> vlan table, IPs, etc. >> >> Any comments as to whether this would be useful(or useless) would be >> welcome. >> > > Speaking for myself, I would say, yes, it sounds very interesting. > > Currently the same result can be achieved, by assigning a pseudo-ethernet > interface to a vnet and bridging it to a physical ethernet interface. > It would be nice to offload some things to the hardware. > > Yet, I don't know if the number of changes in the infrastructure worth the > labor, for just one specific hardware. Is ixgbe the only hardware that > support such things? > Or maybe it is some trend of the future? > > As a virtualization user, I find it most useful. > > Nikos >