From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: HW communication debugging interface - ideas? Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 11:51:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20151101.115116.620913426492186507.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20150930135141.GF2098@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, eladr@mellanox.com, idosch@mellanox.com To: jiri@resnulli.us Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:53829 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751641AbbKAQvS (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Nov 2015 11:51:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150930135141.GF2098@nanopsycho.orion> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jiri Pirko Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 15:51:41 +0200 > 2) generic Netlink (genl) interface. Easy to put metadata in, including the > device identificator (pci address). User then can use nlmon in order to > be able to use wireshark to see the netlink messages. > > Looks like 2) might be viable, well-defined, generic interface to carry > this info. What do you think? Does this make sense? Sorry for the late response. I definitely prefer this netlink idea, particularly for the metadata aspect. Yes, the ethernet frames should "identify" the device, but I much more like the idea of precisely having the geographic ID of the device (PCI ID, whatever) available as metadata as well.