From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wright Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtnetlink: make SR-IOV VF interface symmetric Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 09:10:43 -0700 Message-ID: <20100517161043.GB8301@sequoia.sous-sol.org> References: <20100515031416.GE15313@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <201005151104.41158.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Chris Wright , davem@davemloft.net, kaber@trash.net, mitch.a.williams@intel.com, scofeldm@cisco.com, shemminger@vyatta.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Return-path: Received: from sous-sol.org ([216.99.217.87]:41297 "EHLO sequoia.sous-sol.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752394Ab0EQQK4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2010 12:10:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201005151104.41158.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: * Arnd Bergmann (arnd@arndb.de) wrote: > On Saturday 15 May 2010 05:14:16 Chris Wright wrote: > > Now we have a set of nested attributes: > > > > IFLA_VFINFO_LIST (NESTED) > > IFLA_VF_INFO (NESTED) > > IFLA_VF_MAC > > IFLA_VF_VLAN > > IFLA_VF_TX_RATE > > > > This allows a single set to operate on multiple attributes if desired. > > Among other things, it means a dump can be replayed to set state. > > > > The current interface has yet to be released, so this seems like > > something to consider for 2.6.34. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wright > Very nice! This would be the minimum change to make the ABI conform > to the general rules, so it would be really good to have that. > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann > > It does make the interface a bit strange (less than before), since the > new IFLA_VF_INFO now contains three nested attributes that each contain their > own vf number field, and we don't require that they are identical or that > each of the nested attributes inside VF_INFO appears only once. > > How about a second patch that splits out an IFLA_VF_NUMBER attribute > and makes do_setvfinfo use nla_parse_nested instead of nla_for_each_nested > in order to tighten the rules on this some more? Yes, that's a great idea Arnd. I'll tighten that up. thanks, -chris