[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B059563.3010702@trash.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:58:43 +0100
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: "Williams, Mitch A" <mitch.a.williams@...el.com>
CC: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"shemminger@...tta.com" <shemminger@...tta.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] net: Add support to netdev ops for changing hardware
queue MAC and VLAN filters
Williams, Mitch A wrote:
> However, I'm still back to code complexity, and general usage models.
>
> Please explain specifically what you perceive to be the difference between:
>
> $ ip link set eth1 queue 1 mac <blah>
> $ ip link set eth1 queue 1 vlan <foo>
>
> and
>
> $ ip link set eth1 queue 1 mac <blah> vlan <foo>
>
> The two filter types are, in my mind, completely orthogonal. You can have one, or the other, or both, or neither. What do we gain by glomming both options on one command line? And is this worth the tradeoff of more complex code?
One argument would be that "ip link show" should probably display
all filters, so they all need to be included in the dump message.
And this is exactly the same message type used for configuring
links and the API is supposed to be symetric, meaning you can
send a dump message with NLM_F_REQUEST to the kernel again and
it (re-)creates the same object.
--
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