[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y00kRzNegS7Obptd@nanopsycho>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 11:45:43 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>,
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Multi-PHYs and multiple-ports bonding support
Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 10:51:00AM CEST, maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com wrote:
[...]
>3) UAPI
>
>>From userspace, we would need ways to list the ports, their state, and
>possibly to configure the bonding parameters. for now in ethtool, we
>don't have the notion of port at all, we just have 1 netdevice == 1
>port. Should we therefore create one netdevice per port ? or stick to
>that one interface and refer to its ports with some ethtool parameters ?
I don't like the idea of having 1 netdev per port. Netdev represents
mostly the MAC entity, and there is only one.
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists