Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:40:27 +0000 | From | Thomas Graf <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] net: Support for switch port configuration |
| |
On 12/15/14 at 02:29pm, Varlese, Marco wrote: > > All of these are highly generic and should *not* be passed through from user > > space to the driver directly but rather be properly abstracted as Roopa > > proposed. The value of this API is abstraction. > How would you let the user enable/disable features then? For instance, how would the user enable/disable flooding for broadcast packets (BFLOODING) on a given port? What I was proposing is to have a list of attributes (to be added in if_link.h) which can be tuned by the user using a tool like iproute2. What do you propose?
Excellent, I agree with what you are saying. What set me off is that the patch does not reflect that yet. Instead, the patch introduces a pure Netlink pass-through API to the driver.
I would expect the patch to: 1. Parse the Netlink messages and be aware of individual attributes 2. Validate them 3. Pass the configuration to the driver using an API that can also be consumed from in-kernel users.
> I think I have seen Roopa posting his updated ndo patch and getting some feedback by few people already and as long as I will be able to accomplish the use case described here I am happy with his way.
I think Roopa's patches are supplementary. Not all switchdev users will be backed with a Linux Bridge. I therefore welcome your patches very much.
The overlap is in the ndo. I think both the API you propose and Roopa's bridge code should use the same NDO.
> I do not have an example right now of a vendor specific attribute but I was just saying that might happen (i.e. someone will have a feature not implemented by others?).
That's fine. Once we have them we can consider adding vendor specific extensions.
| |