From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [net-next,1/2] add iovnl netlink support Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 23:22:36 +0200 Message-ID: <201004212322.36671.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20100419191807.10423.84600.stgit@savbu-pc100.cisco.com> <201004201548.26609.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, chrisw@redhat.com To: Scott Feldman Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:57164 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755256Ab0DUVW5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:22:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <201004201548.26609.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tuesday 20 April 2010, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > + * @IOV_ATTR_IFNAME: interface name of master (PF) net device (NLA_NUL_STRING) > > + * @IOV_ATTR_VF_IFNAME: interface name of target VF device (NLA_NUL_STRING) > > As mentioned above, why not drop one of these, and just pass the VF's IFNAME? > Coming back to this point, I now think it would be ideal if we could actually leave out IOV_ATTR_VF_IFNAME and just pass the master IFNAME and the slave MAC address. Since we're not actually doing anything with the slave itself but really talking the switch, it should not be needed at all. That would solve all problems with the slave having moved to another namespace already, and make it totally clear that this is not about configuring the slave but about registering it. Scott, would that still work with your driver? Arnd