On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 23:09:45 +0200
Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 03:57:55PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > Hi Tim,
> >
> > On 8/8/22 3:18 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > I'm trying to understand if there is any implication of 'ethernet<n>'
> > > aliases in Linux such as:
> > > aliases {
> > > ethernet0 = &eqos;
> > > ethernet1 = &fec;
> > > ethernet2 = &lan1;
> > > ethernet3 = &lan2;
> > > ethernet4 = &lan3;
> > > ethernet5 = &lan4;
> > > ethernet6 = &lan5;
> > > };
> > >
> > > I know U-Boot boards that use device-tree will use these aliases to
> > > name the devices in U-Boot such that the device with alias 'ethernet0'
> > > becomes eth0 and alias 'ethernet1' becomes eth1 but for Linux it
> > > appears that the naming of network devices that are embedded (ie SoC)
> > > vs enumerated (ie pci/usb) are always based on device registration
> > > order which for static drivers depends on Makefile linking order and
> > > has nothing to do with device-tree.
> > >
> > > Is there currently any way to control network device naming in Linux
> > > other than udev?
> >
> > You can also use systemd-networkd et al. (but that is the same kind of mechanism)
> >
> > > Does Linux use the ethernet<n> aliases for anything at all?
> >
> > No :l
>
> Maybe it's a great opportunity for porting biosdevname to DT based
> platforms ;-)
Sorry, biosdevname was wrong way to do things.
Did you look at the internals, it was dumpster diving as root into BIOS.
Systemd-networkd does things in much more supportable manner using existing
sysfs API's.
