From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [RFC] bridge and friends: reduce TheLinuxWay(tm) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 09:54:57 -0400 Message-ID: <525E9AB1.6090502@mojatatu.com> References: <525C62D5.3090004@mojatatu.com> <20131014144156.6dc52a78@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stephen Hemminger , Vlad Yasevich , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-ye0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:41995 "EHLO mail-ye0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934252Ab3JPNzI (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 09:55:08 -0400 Received: by mail-ye0-f174.google.com with SMTP id l2so151905yen.5 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 06:55:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20131014144156.6dc52a78@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/14/13 17:41, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Unfortunately, by now this is all set in ABI. > It was a side effect of the per-feature evolutionary style of development. Sadly, I agree. This is the dark side of "have code will travel"; you let these things out in the wild, they breed and you cant take them back. BTW: I dont think what i suggested will be a harmful refactoring because no existing interfaces are removed - your call. In similar vein: What is the motivation behind IFLA_EXT_MASK? Could you not have used ifm ifindex to relay the interface of interest? Currently the ifindex is not used at all. IMO, the following interfaces are useful: - get attributes for all bridge ports (this is there) - get attributes for bridge interface XXX; there using IFLA_EXT_MASK I think it should be using ifm->ifindex - get attributes for all bridge ports for bridge br-blah (not there) you could also use the ifindex of br-blah here instead Separate issue: To provide equivalence to brctl: - PF_BRIDGE should allow me to attach a bridge port to bridge of choice with SETLINK cheers, jamal