From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Benc Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute2: show network device dependency tree Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 11:22:28 +0100 Message-ID: <20170301112228.713bd4d5@griffin> References: <20170225165900.10129-1-zaboj.campula@post.cz> <20170225173927.GA2479@nanopsycho> <1488054142.3856.15.camel@post.cz> <20170226075633.GA1788@nanopsycho> <1488117614.1903.2.camel@post.cz> <20170226144610.GB2071@nanopsycho.orion> <20170227173825.39e00c61@griffin> <1488312457.2131.2.camel@post.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jiri Pirko , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Zaboj Campula Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60322 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751499AbdCAKbx (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2017 05:31:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1488312457.2131.2.camel@post.cz> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 20:07:37 +0000, Zaboj Campula wrote: > Well it is impossible to draw a simple tree showing the configuration > exactly with all details. May be it is too ambitious to draw a tree > at all. I tried that and failed. I didn't want to have something that would work only "somehow" as that would create confusion instead of helping. See the example below. > But neither directory structure is a tree (when consider links) > and there are a plenty of tools showing directory tree. Directory structure *is* a tree. Symlinks are a special case, for the purpose of displaying the tree they're just files. Hardlinks can be ignored when displaying a tree (because there are no hardlinks to directories). We don't have any of that. Consider the very simple case of an interface with two vlan interfaces and both of them in a bridge. vlan0 / \ eth0 br0 \ / vlan1 You can't represent this in a tree view. And this is just a very simple example, in reality it tends to be much more complex. Jiri