From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v7 08/13] net: sched: add rt netlink message
 type for block get
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:11:47 +0100
Message-ID: <20180111111147.GD2053@nanopsycho.orion>
References: <20180109140731.1022-1-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <20180109140731.1022-9-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <9baf8774-cd25-4b85-fc29-a60a2972adf6@gmail.com>
 <20180111093710.GA2053@nanopsycho.orion>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, jhs@mojatatu.com,
        xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, mlxsw@mellanox.com, andrew@lunn.ch,
        vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
        michael.chan@broadcom.com, ganeshgr@chelsio.com,
        saeedm@mellanox.com, matanb@mellanox.com, leonro@mellanox.com,
        idosch@mellanox.com, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com,
        simon.horman@netronome.com, pieter.jansenvanvuuren@netronome.com,
        john.hurley@netronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@intel.com,
        ogerlitz@mellanox.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
        daniel@iogearbox.net
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:46018 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932861AbeAKLLt (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 11 Jan 2018 06:11:49 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id i186so4686835wmi.4
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 03:11:48 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180111093710.GA2053@nanopsycho.orion>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:37:10AM CET, jiri@resnulli.us wrote:
>Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 05:48:09PM CET, dsahern@gmail.com wrote:
>>On 1/9/18 7:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> index 9c026d9..038cde7 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> @@ -150,6 +150,12 @@ enum {
>>>  	RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT = 96,
>>>  #define RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT
>>>  
>>> +	RTM_NEWBLOCK = 100,
>>> +#define RTM_NEWBLOCK RTM_NEWBLOCK
>>> +	RTM_DELBLOCK,
>>> +#define RTM_DELBLOCK RTM_DELBLOCK
>>> +	RTM_GETBLOCK,
>>> +#define RTM_GETBLOCK RTM_GETBLOCK
>>>  	__RTM_MAX,
>>>  #define RTM_MAX		(((__RTM_MAX + 3) & ~3) - 1)
>>>  };
>>
>>Seems like this is creating an inconsistency. RTM_GETBLOCK is used to
>>dump the set of shared blocks, but RTM_NEWBLOCK / RTM_DELBLOCK are not
>>used to create / delete one.
>
>Why is it a problem? RTM_NEWBLOCK is used as a reply for RTM_GETBLOCK.
>I plan to have block notifications as a follow-up, there the RTM_GETBLOCK

I mean RTM_NEWBLOCK and RTM_DELBLOCK of couse.

>and RTM_DELBLOCK will be used. The fact the user cannot create and
>delete block explicitly is no problem in my opinion. The block creation
>and deletion is done according to usage of qdiscs.