[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160205173841.GA23058@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 09:38:42 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, idosch@...lanox.com,
eladr@...lanox.com, yotamg@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com,
yishaih@...lanox.com, dledford@...hat.com, sean.hefty@...el.com,
hal.rosenstock@...il.com, eugenia@...lanox.com,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com,
hadarh@...lanox.com, jhs@...atatu.com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, jbenc@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/6] Introduce devlink interface and first
drivers to use it
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 11:01:22AM +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>
> Okay. I see it more as changing mode of operation of hardware and thus has
> not really anything to do with networking. If you say you change ethernet to
> infiniband it has something to do with networking, sure. But I am fine with
> this, I just thought the code size could be reduced by adding this to sysfs
> quite a lot. I don't have a strong opinion on this.
there is already a way to change eth/ib via
echo 'eth' > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/mlx4_core/0000:02:00.0/mlx4_port1
sounds like this is another way to achieve the same?
Why not hide echo/cat in iproute2 instead of adding parallel netlink api?
Or this is for switches instead of nics?
Then why it's not adding to switchdev?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists