From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, sthemmin@microsoft.com,
mlxsw@mellanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] longer netdev names proposal
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:29:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190628072945.GA2236@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26b73332-9ea0-9d2c-9185-9de522c72bb9@gmail.com>
Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 07:14:31PM CEST, dsahern@gmail.com wrote:
>On 6/27/19 3:43 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Hi all.
>>
>> In the past, there was repeatedly discussed the IFNAMSIZ (16) limit for
>> netdevice name length. Now when we have PF and VF representors
>> with port names like "pfXvfY", it became quite common to hit this limit:
>> 0123456789012345
>> enp131s0f1npf0vf6
>> enp131s0f1npf0vf22
>
>QinQ (stacked vlans) is another example.
There are more usecases for this, yes.
>
>>
>> Since IFLA_NAME is just a string, I though it might be possible to use
>> it to carry longer names as it is. However, the userspace tools, like
>> iproute2, are doing checks before print out. So for example in output of
>> "ip addr" when IFLA_NAME is longer than IFNAMSIZE, the netdevice is
>> completely avoided.
>>
>> So here is a proposal that might work:
>> 1) Add a new attribute IFLA_NAME_EXT that could carry names longer than
>> IFNAMSIZE, say 64 bytes. The max size should be only defined in kernel,
>> user should be prepared for any string size.
>> 2) Add a file in sysfs that would indicate that NAME_EXT is supported by
>> the kernel.
>
>no sysfs files.
>
>Johannes added infrastructure to retrieve the policy. That is a more
>flexible and robust option for determining what the kernel supports.
Sure, udev can query rtnetlink. I just proposed it as an option, anyway,
it's implementation detail.
>
>
>> 3) Udev is going to look for the sysfs indication file. In case when
>> kernel supports long names, it will do rename to longer name, setting
>> IFLA_NAME_EXT. If not, it does what it does now - fail.
>> 4) There are two cases that can happen during rename:
>> A) The name is shorter than IFNAMSIZ
>> -> both IFLA_NAME and IFLA_NAME_EXT would contain the same string:
>> original IFLA_NAME = eth0
>> original IFLA_NAME_EXT = eth0
>> renamed IFLA_NAME = enp5s0f1npf0vf1
>> renamed IFLA_NAME_EXT = enp5s0f1npf0vf1
>> B) The name is longer tha IFNAMSIZ
>> -> IFLA_NAME would contain the original one, IFLA_NAME_EXT would
>> contain the new one:
>> original IFLA_NAME = eth0
>> original IFLA_NAME_EXT = eth0
>> renamed IFLA_NAME = eth0
>> renamed IFLA_NAME_EXT = enp131s0f1npf0vf22
>
>so kernel side there will be 2 names for the same net_device?
Yes. However, updated tools (which would be eventually all) are going to
show only the ext one.
>
>>
>> This would allow the old tools to work with "eth0" and the new
>> tools would work with "enp131s0f1npf0vf22". In sysfs, there would
>> be symlink from one name to another.
>
>I would prefer a solution that does not rely on sysfs hooks.
Please note that this /sys/class/net/ifacename dirs are already created.
What I propose is to have symlink from ext to the short name or vice
versa. The solution really does not "rely" on this...
>
>>
>> Also, there might be a warning added to kernel if someone works
>> with IFLA_NAME that the userspace tool should be upgraded.
>
>that seems like spam and confusion for the first few years of a new api.
Spam? warn_once?
>
>>
>> Eventually, only IFLA_NAME_EXT is going to be used by everyone.
>>
>> I'm aware there are other places where similar new attribute
>> would have to be introduced too (ip rule for example).
>> I'm not saying this is a simple work.
>>
>> Question is what to do with the ioctl api (get ifindex etc). I would
>> probably leave it as is and push tools to use rtnetlink instead.
>
>The ioctl API is going to be a limiter here. ifconfig is still quite
>prevalent and net-snmp still uses ioctl (as just 2 common examples).
>snmp showing one set of names and rtnetlink s/w showing another is going
>to be really confusing.
I don't see other way though, do you? The ioctl names are unextendable :/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-28 7:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-27 9:43 [RFC] longer netdev names proposal Jiri Pirko
2019-06-27 15:29 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 16:12 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-27 17:14 ` David Ahern
2019-06-27 18:08 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-27 18:23 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 18:35 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-06-27 18:39 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-27 19:20 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 19:35 ` Dan Williams
2019-06-28 7:35 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 11:12 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 11:42 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-28 12:25 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 13:14 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-06-28 13:55 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 15:44 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-28 15:56 ` Jiri Pirko
2019-06-28 16:27 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-06-28 7:29 ` Jiri Pirko [this message]
2019-06-27 17:48 ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-06-27 17:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190628072945.GA2236@nanopsycho \
--to=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
--cc=mlxsw@mellanox.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sthemmin@microsoft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).