From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v7 08/13] net: sched: add rt netlink message type
 for block get
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:48:09 -0700
Message-ID: <9baf8774-cd25-4b85-fc29-a60a2972adf6@gmail.com>
References: <20180109140731.1022-1-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <20180109140731.1022-9-jiri@resnulli.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 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: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pl0-f66.google.com ([209.85.160.66]:36976 "EHLO
        mail-pl0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S965666AbeAJQsN (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:48:13 -0500
Received: by mail-pl0-f66.google.com with SMTP id s3so7600222plp.4
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:48:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20180109140731.1022-9-jiri@resnulli.us>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

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.