Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 05:14:49PM CEST, ro...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 2:35 AM Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us> wrote:
>>
>> Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:22:42AM CEST, da...@davemloft.net wrote:
>> >From: Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us>
>> >Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 09:08:08 +0200
>> >
>> >> Okay, so if I understand correctly, on top of separate commands for
>> >> add/del of alternative names, you suggest also get/dump to be separate
>> >> command and don't fill this up in existing newling/getlink command.
>> >
>> >I'm not sure what to do yet.
>> >
>> >David has a point, because the only way these ifnames are useful is
>> >as ways to specify and choose net devices. So based upon that I'm
>> >slightly learning towards not using separate commands.
>>
>> Well yeah, one can use it to handle existing commands instead of
>> IFLA_NAME.
>>
>> But why does it rule out separate commands? I think it is cleaner than
>> to put everything in poor setlink messages :/ The fact that we would
>> need to add "OP" to the setlink message just feels of. Other similar
>> needs may show up in the future and we may endup in ridiculous messages
>> like:
>>
>> SETLINK
>> IFLA_NAME eth0
>> IFLA_ATLNAME_LIST (nest)
>> IFLA_ALTNAME_OP add
>> IFLA_ALTNAME somereallylongname
>> IFLA_ALTNAME_OP del
>> IFLA_ALTNAME somereallyreallylongname
>> IFLA_ALTNAME_OP add
>> IFLA_ALTNAME someotherreallylongname
>> IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_LIST (nest)
>> IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_OP add
>> ...
>> IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_OP del
>> ...
>> IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_OP add
>> ...
>>
>> I don't know what to think about it. Rollbacks are going to be pure hell :/
>
>I don't see a huge problem with the above. We need a way to solve this
>anyways for other list types in the future correct ?.
>The approach taken by this series will not scale if we have to add a
>new msg type and header for every such list attribute in the future.
Do you have some other examples in mind? So far, this was not needed.
>
>A good parallel here is bridge vlan which uses RTM_SETLINK and
>RTM_DELLINK for vlan add and deletes. But it does have an advantage of
>a separate
>msg space under AF_BRIDGE which makes it cleaner. Maybe something
>closer to that can be made to work (possibly with a msg flag) ?.
1) Not sure if AF_BRIDGE is the right example how to do things
2) See br_vlan_info(). It is not an OP-PER-VLAN. You either add or
delete all passed info, depending on the cmd (RTM_SETLINK/RTM_DETLINK).
>
>Would be good to have a consistent way to update list attributes for
>future needs too.
Okay. Do you suggest to have new set of commands to handle
adding/deleting lists of items? altNames now, others (other nests) later?
Something like:
CMD SETLISTS
IFLA_NAME eth0
IFLA_ATLNAME_LIST (nest)
IFLA_ALTNAME somereallylongname
IFLA_ALTNAME somereallyreallylongname
IFLA_ALTNAME someotherreallylongname
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_LIST (nest)
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE
CMD DELLISTS
IFLA_NAME eth0
IFLA_ATLNAME_LIST (nest)
IFLA_ALTNAME somereallylongname
IFLA_ALTNAME somereallyreallylongname
IFLA_ALTNAME someotherreallylongname
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_LIST (nest)
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE
IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE
How does this sound?
