[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231129094943.13f1ae0c@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 09:49:43 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric
Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jonathan
Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
donald.hunter@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v1 0/6] tools/net/ynl: Add dynamic selector
for options attrs
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:58:57 +0000 Donald Hunter wrote:
> rt_link shares attribute-sets between different kinds of link so I think
> that rules out putting the key on the attribute-set. I think we may also
> see reuse across stats attribute sets in tc.
>
> FWIW I initially considered avoiding a selector list by using a template
> to generate the attribute set name, but that broke pretty quickly.
Ah :(
> It seems reasonable to pull the selector list out of line because
> they do get big, e.g. over 100 lines for tc "options".
>
> My preference is 1, probably including a fallback to "binary" if there
> is no selector match.
Are there any "nests" that need a real binary type? An actual byte
array? Or are these all structs? If the latter then fixed-header
covers it.
> I think that once you have broken out to a sub-message, they're no
> longer "nested-attributes" and we should maybe reuse "attribute-set".
Good point.
> I don't think we can reuse "sub-type" because the schema for it is the
> set of netlink type names, not a free string. Maybe we add "sub-message"
> instead?
Sounds good.
> So how about this:
>
> attribute-sets:
> -
> name: outside-attrs
> attributes:
> ...
> -
> name: kind
> type: string
> -
> name: options
> type: sub-message
> sub-message: inside-msg
> selector: kind
> ...
> -
> name: inside-attrs:
> attributes:
> ...
>
> sub-messages:
> -
> name: inside-msg
> formats:
> -
> value: some-value
> fixed-header: struct-name
> -
> value: other-value
> fixed-header: struct-name-two
> attribute-set: inside-attrs
> -
> value: another-one
> attribute-set: inside-attrs
> -
> name: different-inside-msg
> ...
>
> operations:
> ...
LG!
> I cannot think of a better name than "formats" so happy to go with that.
Or maybe "variants" ?
> Did you want an explicit "list:" in the yaml schema?
You mean instead of the "formats" or in addition somewhere?
Under sub-messages?
The "formats" is basically a "list", just feels less artificial
to call it something else than "list". No strong preference, tho.
If you mean under "sub-messages" - I can't think of any extra property
we may want to put there. So going directly to entries seems fine.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists