From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH net] failover: eliminate callback hell Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2018 15:30:27 +0300 Message-ID: <20180606151955-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20180605034231.31610-1-sthemmin@microsoft.com> <20180606072512.GA2289@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Stephen Hemminger , kys@microsoft.com, haiyangz@microsoft.com, davem@davemloft.net, sridhar.samudrala@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Hemminger To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:37816 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750795AbeFFMa2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jun 2018 08:30:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180606072512.GA2289@nanopsycho.orion> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 09:25:12AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 05:42:31AM CEST, stephen@networkplumber.org wrote: > >The net failover should be a simple library, not a virtual > >object with function callbacks (see callback hell). > > Why just a library? It should do a common things. I think it should be a > virtual object. Looks like your patch again splits the common > functionality into multiple drivers. That is kind of backwards attitude. > I don't get it. We should rather focus on fixing the mess the > introduction of netvsc-bonding caused and switch netvsc to 3-netdev > model. So it seems that at least one benefit for netvsc would be better handling of renames. Question is how can this change to 3-netdev happen? Stephen is concerned about risk of breaking some userspace. Stephen, this seems to be the usecase that IFF_HIDDEN was trying to address, and you said then "why not use existing network namespaces rather than inventing a new abstraction". So how about it then? Do you want to find a way to use namespaces to hide the PV device for netvsc compatibility? -- MST