[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140114215301.GA31555@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 23:53:01 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Michael Dalton <mwdalton@...gle.com>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
lf-virt <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/4] virtio-net: initial debugfs support,
export mergeable rx buffer size
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 01:45:42PM -0800, Michael Dalton wrote:
> I'd like to confirm the preferred sysfs path structure for mergeable
> receive buffers. Is 'mergeable_rx_buffer_size' the right attribute name
> to use or is there a strong preference for a different name?
>
> I believe the current approach proposed for the next patchset is to use a
> per-netdev attribute group which we will add to the receive
> queue kobj (struct netdev_rx_queue). That leaves us with at
> least two options:
> (1) Name the attribute group something, e.g., 'virtio-net', in which
> case all virtio-net attributes for eth0 queue N will be of
> the form:
> /sys/class/net/eth0/queues/rx-N/virtio-net/<attribute name>
>
> (2) Do not name the attribute group (leave the name NULL), in which
> case AFAICT virtio-net and device-independent attributes would be
> mixed without any indication. For example, all virtio-net
> attributes for netdev eth0 queue N would be of the form:
> /sys/class/net/eth0/queues/rx-N/<attribute name>
>
> FWIW, the bonding netdev has a similar sysfs issue and uses a per-netdev
> attribute group (stored in the 'sysfs_groups' field of struct netdevice)
> In the case of bonding, the attribute group is named, so
> device-independent netdev attributes are found in
> /sys/class/net/eth0/<attribute name> while bonding attributes are placed
> in /sys/class/net/eth0/bonding/<attribute name>.
>
> So it seems like there is some precedent for using an attribute group
> name corresponding to the driver name. Does using an attribute group
> name of 'virtio-net' sound good or would an empty or different attribute
> group name be preferred?
>
> Best,
>
> Mike
I'm guessing we should follow the bonding example.
What do others think?
--
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