[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:27:03 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Sujit K M <sjt.kar@...il.com>
Cc: Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@...l.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org,
Narendra_K@...l.com, jordan_hargrave@...l.com
Subject: Re: PATCH: Network Device Naming mechanism and policy
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 01:47:39PM +0530, Sujit K M wrote:
> Greg,
>
>
> > No, the hardware changes the enumeration order, it places _no_
> > guarantees on what order stuff will be found in. ?So this is not the
> > kernel changing, just to be clear.
> > Again, I have a machine here that likes to reorder PCI devices every 4th
> > or so boot times, and that's fine according to the PCI spec. ?Yeah, it's
> > a crappy BIOS, but the manufacturer rightly pointed out that it is not
> > in violation of anything.
> >
>
> I think the open call should be implemented then. By the patch very little
> knowledge is being shared on type of network implementation it is trying to
> do.
What would open() accomplish? What good would the file descriptor be?
What could you use it for?
> Also it is messing with core datastructure and procedures. This seems
> to be simplified by changing implementing the other operations like poll().
I don't understand.
> > That is why all distros name network devices based on the only
> > deterministic thing they have today, the MAC address. ?I still fail to
> > see why you do not like this solution, it is honestly the only way to
> > properly name network devices in a sane manner.
>
> This is feature that needs to be implemented. As per the rules followed.
This feature is already implemented today, all distros have it.
> > All distros also provide a way to easily rename the network devices, to
> > place a specific name on a specific MAC address, so again, this should
> > all be solved already.
> >
> > No matter how badly your BIOS teams mess up the PCI enumeration order :)
>
> This is an problem, But I think this can be solved by implementing some of the
> routines in the network device.
I don't, see the rules that your distro ships today for persistant
network devices, it's already there, no need to change the kernel at
all.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists