From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, sthemmin@microsoft.com,
mlxsw@mellanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] longer netdev names proposal
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:29:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190628072945.GA2236@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26b73332-9ea0-9d2c-9185-9de522c72bb9@gmail.com>
Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 07:14:31PM CEST, dsahern@gmail.com wrote:
>On 6/27/19 3:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Hi all.
>>
>> In the past, there was repeatedly discussed the IFNAMSIZ (16) limit for
>> netdevice name length. Now when we have PF and VF representors
>> with port names like "pfXvfY", it became quite common to hit this limit:
>> 0123456789012345
>> enp131s0f1npf0vf6
>> enp131s0f1npf0vf22
>
>QinQ (stacked vlans) is another example.
There are more usecases for this, yes.
>
>>
>> Since IFLA_NAME is just a string, I though it might be possible to use
>> it to carry longer names as it is. However, the userspace tools, like
>> iproute2, are doing checks before print out. So for example in output of
>> "ip addr" when IFLA_NAME is longer than IFNAMSIZE, the netdevice is
>> completely avoided.
>>
>> So here is a proposal that might work:
>> 1) Add a new attribute IFLA_NAME_EXT that could carry names longer than
>> IFNAMSIZE, say 64 bytes. The max size should be only defined in kernel,
>> user should be prepared for any string size.
>> 2) Add a file in sysfs that would indicate that NAME_EXT is supported by
>> the kernel.
>
>no sysfs files.
>
>Johannes added infrastructure to retrieve the policy. That is a more
>flexible and robust option for determining what the kernel supports.
Sure, udev can query rtnetlink. I just proposed it as an option, anyway,
it's implementation detail.
>
>
>> 3) Udev is going to look for the sysfs indication file. In case when
>> kernel supports long names, it will do rename to longer name, setting
>> IFLA_NAME_EXT. If not, it does what it does now - fail.
>> 4) There are two cases that can happen during rename:
>> A) The name is shorter than IFNAMSIZ
>> -> both IFLA_NAME and IFLA_NAME_EXT would contain the same string:
>> original IFLA_NAME = eth0
>> original IFLA_NAME_EXT = eth0
>> renamed IFLA_NAME = enp5s0f1npf0vf1
>> renamed IFLA_NAME_EXT = enp5s0f1npf0vf1
>> B) The name is longer tha IFNAMSIZ
>> -> IFLA_NAME would contain the original one, IFLA_NAME_EXT would
>> contain the new one:
>> original IFLA_NAME = eth0
>> original IFLA_NAME_EXT = eth0
>> renamed IFLA_NAME = eth0
>> renamed IFLA_NAME_EXT = enp131s0f1npf0vf22
>
>so kernel side there will be 2 names for the same net_device?
Yes. However, updated tools (which would be eventually all) are going to
show only the ext one.
>
>>
>> This would allow the old tools to work with "eth0" and the new
>> tools would work with "enp131s0f1npf0vf22". In sysfs, there would
>> be symlink from one name to another.
>
>I would prefer a solution that does not rely on sysfs hooks.
Please note that this /sys/class/net/ifacename dirs are already created.
What I propose is to have symlink from ext to the short name or vice
versa. The solution really does not "rely" on this...
>
>>
>> Also, there might be a warning added to kernel if someone works
>> with IFLA_NAME that the userspace tool should be upgraded.
>
>that seems like spam and confusion for the first few years of a new api.
Spam? warn_once?
>
>>
>> Eventually, only IFLA_NAME_EXT is going to be used by everyone.
>>
>> I'm aware there are other places where similar new attribute
>> would have to be introduced too (ip rule for example).
>> I'm not saying this is a simple work.
>>
>> Question is what to do with the ioctl api (get ifindex etc). I would
>> probably leave it as is and push tools to use rtnetlink instead.
>
>The ioctl API is going to be a limiter here. ifconfig is still quite
>prevalent and net-snmp still uses ioctl (as just 2 common examples).
>snmp showing one set of names and rtnetlink s/w showing another is going
>to be really confusing.
I don't see other way though, do you? The ioctl names are unextendable :/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-28 7:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-27 9:43 [RFC] longer netdev names proposal Jiri Pirko
2019-06-27 15:29 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 16:12 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-27 17:14 ` David Ahern
2019-06-27 18:08 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-27 18:23 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 18:35 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-06-27 18:39 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-27 19:20 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 19:35 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-28 7:35 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 11:12 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 11:42 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-28 12:25 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 13:14 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-06-28 13:55 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 15:44 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-28 15:56 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 16:27 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-28 7:29 ` Jiri Pirko [this message]
2019-06-27 17:48 ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-06-27 17:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190628072945.GA2236@nanopsycho \
--to=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
--cc=mlxsw@mellanox.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sthemmin@microsoft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.