From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21908C433F5 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:04:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239379AbhK3IHk (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 03:07:40 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50070 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233878AbhK3IHj (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 03:07:39 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C3BCC061574 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:04:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id a9so42436069wrr.8 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:04:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind.com; s=google; h=reply-to:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BU/92BaHe4dmhxB7ODPEPDd8pWIhuBNxhjbCDaTqdWU=; b=AZmDE9fdueUn/T0dHIJB1TzmQsVXXTv8TY9mdeE1F2fVB8mzq14Yohcm1Vp63LQmOG Eh3UyVuS4arKBbKrSiKxUvZ5j+4DNBPKVLRSl4ObT2iTUgtkJNfX4M5/0ccYiNawnLg3 3ZavZu0F0pkLHfc6yPkTWUjx3tHekc0zuCIbp7EsLXKg7bFgvalN0HC4LOpGYiwQymAh 4+O0VP0legaDJzU+n8WYjRlOiaZe4uh7iH0doDGoFwzUQVzcLyPC2p9rDZnLiTwCBFhr byXPANXecqV0StnsuRIKHPAHUmlCo9dEZ/R666mQwfenO59mlbUVxucOB3MBKthzUBej 2pYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:subject:to:cc:references:from :organization:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BU/92BaHe4dmhxB7ODPEPDd8pWIhuBNxhjbCDaTqdWU=; b=ZwxuKaAOHZXp8zxsf/a8We0GiFV5WC+OZ4NkkXKgv+hUQzdyS3ItWDO9tY1MK8Zyut gjxKWEGe8GdoUHN+jv92lA20u6OPRuG4Y+QrGnmGiqGo80qkUvoXs1TCOdK6oT3/17oT yfTcmAbZNjBE2OJ+neHTQTJtEBTFJ+1qUZatQidCS5wPqyNqzIuO9sfsIT5CcVkZsbmR dIpTXh9dqMAH9WLlOjm+m+yPZ/NjYEsQGrosERFuOHckZ/q5WMEBEeuVvBIuHiVofwRB D9BpaAF0QSV0aeJA+UrAjrFv+Hq7vnP+9lYFCfK3vzl5yjVhXS8NbfRFLdjkJQWXAFO0 XtNQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Naj+1tsuW1PZLeQEpMt24BlXK3htKkbWtGyjaXlKQS+VlYEHn Xgoe59NbNIrhSzWDxwTkJUagGObFSD8OqA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyfSJjFG0B4n5OzGpez2NvPlmJSnncpzcf677PLSriAXGEQ1nAfTZdDL4LLZ9+EejIFE90s8A== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fe8e:: with SMTP id l14mr39805670wrr.177.1638259459269; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:04:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a01:e0a:b41:c160:854f:2f27:d1d8:2752? ([2a01:e0a:b41:c160:854f:2f27:d1d8:2752]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c6sm1907661wmq.46.2021.11.30.00.04.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:04:18 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] rtnetlink: Support fine-grained netdevice bulk deletion To: Jakub Kicinski , David Ahern Cc: Lahav Schlesinger , Leon Romanovsky , netdev@vger.kernel.org References: <20211125165146.21298-1-lschlesinger@drivenets.com> <20211128111313.hjywmtmnipg4ul4f@kgollan-pc> <09296394-a69a-ee66-0897-c9018185cfde@gmail.com> <20211129135307.mxtfw6j7v4hdex4f@kgollan-pc> <21da13fb-e629-0d6e-1aa1-56e2eb86d1c3@gmail.com> <20211129101031.25d35a5d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> From: Nicolas Dichtel Organization: 6WIND Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 09:04:18 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20211129101031.25d35a5d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Le 29/11/2021 à 19:10, Jakub Kicinski a écrit : > On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 08:30:16 -0700 David Ahern wrote: >> On 11/29/21 6:53 AM, Lahav Schlesinger wrote: >>> Hi David, while I also don't have any strong preference here, my >>> reasoning for failing the whole request if one device can't be deleted >>> was so it will share the behaviour we currently have with group deletion. >>> If you're okay with this asymmetry I'll send a V4. >> >> good point - new features should be consistent with existing code. >> >> You can add another attribute to the request to say 'Skip devices that >> can not be deleted'. > > The patch is good as is then? I can resurrect it from 'Changes > Requested' and apply. > > Any opinion on wrapping the ifindices into separate attrs, Dave? > I don't think the 32k vs 64k max distinction matters all that much, I agree. > user can send multiple messages, and we could point the extack at > the correct ifindex's attribute. > Good point, it would be clearer from an API POV.