Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/2] Add ndo_set_vf_port_profile

[Scott Feldman <scofeldm@cisco.com>]

On 4/26/10 3:38 PM, "Rose, Gregory V" <gregory.v.rose@intel.com> wrote:

>> On 4/26/10 12:27 PM, "Scott Feldman" <scofeldm@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Here's a proposal:
>> 
>> Currently we have RTM_GETLINK for
>> 
>>    ip link show [ DEVICE ]
>> 
>> This dumps everything for the DEVICE including info for each VF.  Let's
>> modify RTM_GETLINK to look like this:
>> 
>>    ip link show [ DEVICE [ vf NUM] ]
>> 
>> If you don't give the optional vf NUM you get base dump on DEVICE.  If
>> you
>> give vf NUM, you get the VF-specific dump.  This scales much better with
>> the
>> number of VFs.
>> 
>> (Number of VFs can easily be > 128 in some designs).
>> 
>> Comments?
> 
> It seems to me that this:
> 
> ip link show [ DEVICE ]
> 
> should at least return the number of VFs so
> that you can make sure the subsequent usage of this:

Yes, I believe that's there today:

    NLA_PUT_U32(skb, IFLA_NUM_VF, dev_num_vf(dev->dev.parent));

The number of VFs is returned in RTM_GETLINK.  But, it's only returned if:

    if (dev->netdev_ops->ndo_get_vf_config && dev->dev.parent)

For my proposal, I'll need to return IFLA_NUM_VF unconditionally so callers
can get num VFs.
 
> ip link show [ DEVICE [ vf NUM ] ]
> 
> is still in range with the [ vf NUM ] parameter.  Otherwise you wouldn't know
> what the range of NUM is.
> 
> Other than that I can see why you would want to limit the size of the dump
> when using 'ip link show [ DEVICE ]'.
> 
> - Greg
>