Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 06:53:52PM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 09:20:11 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > static void help(void)
>> > {
>> > pr_err("Usage: devlink [ OPTIONS ] OBJECT { COMMAND | help }\n"
>> > " devlink [ -f[orce] ] -b[atch] filename\n"
>> >- "where OBJECT := { dev | port | sb | monitor | dpipe | resource
>> >| region }\n"
>> >+ "where OBJECT := { dev | port | sb | monitor | dpipe | resource
>> >| region | info }\n"
>>
>> I think that "info" should be nested under "dev". It is related to dev.
>
>Ack.
>
>> Maybe it even does not have to be a separate command and can be a nested
>> attribute to existing DEVLINK_CMD_GET cmd.
>
>I thought about that, but I'd rather keep it as a separate command.
>I think it'd be good to keep DEVLINK_CMD_GET nice and lean.
Okay. Fair enough.
>
>For versions there may be FW communication required, and reading stuff
>out of flash. I bit of overhead for users who just want the list of
>devlink instances.
>
>Having in under dev but as a separate command seems quite nice indeed.
>Especially given that there can only be a show subcommand.. So:
>
>For dump:
>$ devlink dev info
>
>But for get:
>$ devlink dev pci/0000:82:00.0 info
>
>or
>
>$ devlink dev info pci/0000:82:00.0
This is aligned with the rest.
>
>?
