From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roopa Prabhu Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] net: netlink messages for HW addr programming Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:31:27 -0700 Message-ID: <57E0C9AF.4090406@cumulusnetworks.com> References: <1473958082-30982-1-git-send-email-pruddy@brocade.com> <57DEA9E2.3000703@cumulusnetworks.com> <1474296378.31262.59.camel@brocade.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , Luca Boccassi , "alexander.h.duyck@intel.com" , "jiri@resnulli.us" , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich To: Patrick Ruddy Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f176.google.com ([209.85.192.176]:34608 "EHLO mail-pf0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751261AbcITFba (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:31:30 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f176.google.com with SMTP id p64so3311727pfb.1 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:31:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1474296378.31262.59.camel@brocade.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 9/19/16, 7:46 AM, Patrick Ruddy wrote: > On Sun, 2016-09-18 at 07:51 -0700, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >> On 9/15/16, 9:48 AM, Patrick Ruddy wrote: >>> Add RTM_NEWADDR and RTM_DELADDR netlink messages with family >>> AF_UNSPEC to indicate interest in specific unicast and multicast >>> hardware addresses. These messages are sent when addresses are >>> added or deleted from the appropriate interface driver. >>> Added AF_UNSPEC GETADDR function to allow the netlink notifications >>> to be replayed to avoid loss of state due to application start >>> ordering or restart. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Ruddy >>> --- >> RTM_NEWADDR and RTM_DELADDR are not used to add these entries to the kernel. >> so, it seems a bit wrong to use RTM_NEWADDR and RTM_DELADDR to notify them to >> userspace and also to request a special dump of these addresses. >> >> This could just be a new nested netlink attribute in the existing link dump ? > Hi Roopa > > Thanks for the review. I did initially code this using NEW/DEL/GET_LINK > messages but was asked to change to to ADDR messages by Stephen > Hemminger (cc'd). > > However I agree that these addresses fall between the LINK and ADDR > areas so I'm happy to change this if we can reach some consensus on the > format. > ok, thanks for the history. yes, they do lie in a weird spot. the general convention for other rtnl registrations seems to be AF_UNSPEC family means include all supported families. thats where this seems a bit odd. On the other hand, one reason I see where using RTM_*ADDR will be useful for this is if we wanted to provide a way to add these uc and mc address via ip addr add in the future. ip addr add dev eth0 Does this patch allow that in the future ? also, will these l2 addresses now show up in 'ip addr show' output ?. thanks, Roopa