[Open-FCoE] [PATCH v2] fcoe-utils: add DRIVER_NAME to specify the FCoE low-level driver

Bhanu Gollapudi bprakash at broadcom.com
Tue Jan 18 20:57:00 UTC 2011


On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 23:24 -0800, Zou, Yi wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 17:35 -0800, Robert Love wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 18:42 -0800, Nithin Sujir wrote:

> > >
> > > Hi Nithin, Bhanu and Yi,
> > >
> > >    We need an update to the fcoeadm man page, can you resend this with
> > > that addition?
> >
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > There are no changes to fcoadm man page, since none of the options have
> > changed.
> 
> Rob is right, we need to document the added usage model of passing the driver
> name on command line so user can still do manual create w/ a given transport
> driver if not willing to edit the fcoe config file.

OK. We were not aware of this requirement. Will change the man page
accordingly.

> 
> >
> > >
> > >    Also, I was trying to test Yi/Bhanu's v3 kernel series with this
> > > fcoe-utils patch and I can't get things to work.
> > >
> > >    After running 'fipvlan -ac' interface 'eth3.170-fcoe' is created.
> > > When I try to create on that interface using 'fcoeadm -c eth3.170-fcoe'
> > > nothing happens except for the kernel reporting,
> > "fcoe_transport_create:
> > > transport n/a failed to create fcoe on n/a"
> >
> > Shouldn't we pass physical ethernet interface (eth4) instead of the vlan
> > interface?
> Why would vlan interface not work? Both physical and vlan work fine in
> existing fcoe-util w/o any problem. I tested both vlan and physical interfaces
> using echo to libfcoe sysfs entries.

We tested only with AUTO_VLAN = "yes". We'll modify fcoemon/fcoeadm to
support this.






More information about the devel mailing list