[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YpM75y3rf4nUhYsy@nanopsycho>
Date: Sun, 29 May 2022 11:24:55 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com, jiri@...dia.com,
petrm@...dia.com, andrew@...n.ch, mlxsw@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/11] mlxsw: extend line card model by devices
and info
Sat, May 28, 2022 at 05:58:56PM CEST, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>On 5/24/22 8:31 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>
>> $ devlink lc info pci/0000:01:00.0 lc 8
>> pci/0000:01:00.0:
>
>...
>
>>
>> $ devlink lc flash pci/0000:01:00.0 lc 8 file mellanox/fw-AGB-rel-19_2010_1312-022-EVB.mfa2
>
>
>A lot of your proposed syntax for devlink commands has 'lc' twice. If
>'lc' is the subcommand, then you are managing a linecard making 'lc'
>before the '8' redundant. How about 'slot 8' or something along those lines?
Well, there is 1:1 match between cmd line options and output, as always.
Object name is one thing, the option name is different. It is quite
common to name them both the same. I'm not sure I understand why it
would be an issue.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists