From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3491FC433FE for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 15:59:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229459AbiKBP7l (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:59:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38288 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231204AbiKBP7d (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:59:33 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x330.google.com (mail-wm1-x330.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::330]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09CD62BB1F for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 08:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x330.google.com with SMTP id c3-20020a1c3503000000b003bd21e3dd7aso1586985wma.1 for ; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:59:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=resnulli-us.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0HmwDVoTDX878bFuiu5Mhipe13o11Sl5lwKQ0r0neCY=; b=UkQFO/+jC/3eP2DwDSMaWAqMxngNl1Q/8hz/vQ4MnJ/VF05+snfK0t/zVuei969EBd 9eXamExZu/bMwN0EcSeaaAG0z/87t/tzRqq+03LUIuWNH71Ih/8cdO8oX9HHqxVjqU2x GUrayt4RD5//8cu9/17vWzZqDQTWVUZ4WaqapCvL2UsP5j3DGAWNStHwIMoB3wfEUihy HzQOcDkoxAaoAuSjeA6zVzjkD60xJV6xKs/ywondft+Z+4IkhEc3ZJbdH8J8KfQJx7m9 o9nbJdQGIW36wqNPmG5d11p435X+evAOaoEXYaUc3b2X7ErWigr3Y3M+7AKzUM0Qy5hC 9aDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=0HmwDVoTDX878bFuiu5Mhipe13o11Sl5lwKQ0r0neCY=; b=nPNNS4ADk5kwMEgrI618RwwOzf1Dq80Cp6PQo2lzqy7tJ8Eyn8ST/xWC7nsMijKhJD YFZ4nuGKtt6X6asCXyM6bwf7yW8ethpzginHVXWn1OO/HYkuaEBgfqm5hfrxmB2FeQkV THPWseRpmHP8ESnV/lj2ZAXu5nwvzKzwVf0+nH6+cLYm0VcH5wbOiT3duXVBiVrbr5eb z0t6pM8zgZTHsA1YX3uji9kacuI3fO2AJnRSA7hMiU5hPR/ddnNXU7NzH9iIAkKVI2CC 0W3DpACVNgv3tZ+IH7bWfArQmclNxxPM+c5/O2D6++HQ+IzjKyqEQ74pVL3jbzrhXndc lLkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2zMxX/u8eIYwyvExjy0jWuF/tKPFbYkiKx1gHVG5gJLGitmJqK K4e7WFSsmjq6jF9hhRAXp1XwMQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7zWKcp/TeVAVxaVtJ8/1a12InfD2858PbjVhxuwHUTn05c8BBvmtDS829RbZz6TLXImYytHQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3547:b0:3cf:7a9f:d6cd with SMTP id i7-20020a05600c354700b003cf7a9fd6cdmr8395608wmq.30.1667404770346; Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([86.61.181.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bj12-20020a0560001e0c00b0022e55f40bc7sm13431874wrb.82.2022.11.02.08.59.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 08:59:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 16:59:28 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, tariqt@nvidia.com, moshe@nvidia.com, saeedm@nvidia.com, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3 13/13] net: expose devlink port over rtnetlink Message-ID: References: <20221031124248.484405-1-jiri@resnulli.us> <20221031124248.484405-14-jiri@resnulli.us> <20221101091834.4dbdcbc1@kernel.org> <20221102081006.70a81e89@kernel.org> <20221102081325.2086edd8@kernel.org> <20221102085249.3b64e29f@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221102085249.3b64e29f@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 04:52:49PM CET, kuba@kernel.org wrote: >On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 16:37:00 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >> Maybe it's time to plumb policies thru to classic netlink, instead of >> >> creating weird attribute constructs? >> > >> >Not a blocker, FWIW, just pointing out a better alternative. >> >> Or, even better, move RTnetlink to generic netlink. Really, there is no >> point to have it as non-generic netlink forever. We moved ethtool there, >> why not RTnetlink? > >As a rewrite? We could plug in the same callbacks into a genl family >but the replies / notifications would have different headers depending >on the socket type which gets hairy, no? I mean like ethtool, completely side iface, independent, new attrs etc. We can start with NetdevNetlink for example. Just cover netdev part of RTNetlink. That is probably most interesting anyway.