[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y45G/t9V3luxRDGF@DEN-LT-70577>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 19:19:35 +0000
From: <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com>
To: <stephen@...workplumber.org>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <dsahern@...nel.org>, <petrm@...dia.com>,
<maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>, <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next v3 1/2] dcb: add new pcp-prio parameter to
dcb app
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 09:19:06 +0000
> <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Trying to understand your comment.
> > > >
> > > > Are you talking about not producing any JSON output with the symbolic
> > > > PCP values? eg. ["1de", 1] -> [8, 1]. So basically print with PRINT_FP
> > > > in case of printing in JSON context?
> > > >
> > > > /Daniel
> > >
> > > What does output look like in json and non-json versions?
> >
> > non-JSON: pcp-prio 1de:1
> > JSON : {"pcp_prio":[["1de",1]]}
>
> Would the JSON be better as:
> { "pcp_prio" :[ { "1de":1 } ] }
>
> It looks like the PCP values are both unique and used in a name/value manner.
In this case I think it would be best to stay consistent with the rest
of the dcb app code. All priority mappings are printed using the
dcb_app_print_filtered() (now also the pcp-prio), which creates an
array, for whatever reason.
If you are OK with this, I will go ahead and create v4, with the print
warning removed.
/Daniel
>
> >
> > > My concern that the json version would be awkward and have colons in it, but looks
> > > like it won't.
> >
> > Yeah, the "%s:" format is only used in non-JSON context, so we are good
> > here.
> >
> > >
> > > For the unknown key type is printing error necessary? Maybe just show it in numeric form.
> >
> > No not necessary, I'll get rid of it.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists