Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding support for Intel Fortville + DPDK use-case #155

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 11, 2019
Merged

Conversation

Levovar
Copy link
Collaborator

@Levovar Levovar commented Sep 27, 2019

PR solves bullet point 2 described in #148.

It also makes sure to skip kernel tunings for interfaces which are actually not managed by the kernel.

@Levovar Levovar force-pushed the intel_dpdk branch 2 times, most recently from 35d1a30 to e3d6618 Compare September 27, 2019 15:54
@Levovar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Levovar commented Oct 7, 2019

Actually...
This PR is now a generalization of how we do "post-processing" for our interfaces, including setting kernel configs, and creating IP routes etc.
The code is reworked to be entirely generic for all links, under all circumstances.

This greatly streamlines execution paths, and allows to finally get rid of our own IPVLAN interface handling module. All special features originally working only for IPVLAN are now 100% work for everything - even for VFIO bound PCI devices!

…nterfaces.

This enables us to:
- handle ALL activities, in one place, unconditionally
- cleaner code
- finally getting rid of all IPVLAN specific code
- being able to apply post processing even for the dummy interfaces
@Levovar Levovar force-pushed the intel_dpdk branch 2 times, most recently from ffd7d71 to 1429374 Compare October 11, 2019 14:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant