From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 V6 PATCH 1/2] Add netlink support for virtual port management (was iovnl) Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 23:11:53 +0200 Message-ID: <4BEC6B19.1040808@trash.net> References: <20100513201714.25579.53530.stgit@savbu-pc100.cisco.com> <20100513201720.25579.51230.stgit@savbu-pc100.cisco.com> <4BEC63DB.2090306@trash.net> <20100513204614.GB30483@x200.localdomain> <4BEC65BC.5040208@trash.net> <20100513210828.GD30483@x200.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Scott Feldman , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de To: Chris Wright Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:62572 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752385Ab0EMVLz (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 May 2010 17:11:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100513210828.GD30483@x200.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Chris Wright wrote: > * Patrick McHardy (kaber@trash.net) wrote: >> Chris Wright wrote: >>> * Patrick McHardy (kaber@trash.net) wrote: >>>>> + } else { >>>>> + err = rtnl_vf_port_fill_nest(skb, dev, -1); >>>> What does -1 mean? >>> It means no VFs. Could be made a macro/enum constant >> Why call rtnl_vg_port_fill_nest at all in that case? It even >> calls the ndo_get_vf_port() callback. > > For the case where port profile is set on net dev that does not > have VFs (e.g. the enic case in 2/2). Thanks for the explanation. I guess a enum constant would be nice to have. But the bigger problem is the asymetrical message parsing/construction. BTW: > +enum { > + VF_PORT_REQUEST_PREASSOCIATE = 0, > + VF_PORT_REQUEST_PREASSOCIATE_RR, > + VF_PORT_REQUEST_ASSOCIATE, > + VF_PORT_REQUEST_DISASSOCIATE, > +}; Do multiple of these commands have to be issued in order to reach "associated" state? That also wouldn't fit into the rtnetlink design, which contains state, not commands.