On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 09:21:07AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 08:49:25AM CEST, mst@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 09:22:32AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 09:15:44AM CEST, mst@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 08:29:53AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 03:58:10AM CEST, kuba@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >> >On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:32:32 +0800 Cindy Lu wrote: > >> >> >> Add new UAPI to support the mac address from vdpa tool > >> >> >> Function vdpa_nl_cmd_dev_config_set_doit() will get the > >> >> >> MAC address from the vdpa tool and then set it to the device. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The usage is: vdpa dev set name vdpa_name mac **:**:**:**:**:** > >> >> > > >> >> >Why don't you use devlink? > >> >> > >> >> Fair question. Why does vdpa-specific uapi even exist? To have > >> >> driver-specific uapi Does not make any sense to me :/ > >> > > >> >I am not sure which uapi do you refer to? The one this patch proposes or > >> >the existing one? > >> > >> Sure, I'm sure pointing out, that devlink should have been the answer > >> instead of vdpa netlink introduction. That ship is sailed, > > > >> now we have > >> unfortunate api duplication which leads to questions like Jakub's one. > >> That's all :/ > > > > > > > >Yea there's no point to argue now, there were arguments this and that > >way. I don't think we currently have a lot > >of duplication, do we? > > True. I think it would be good to establish guidelines for api > extensions in this area. > > > > >-- > >MST > > Guidelines are good, are there existing examples of such guidelines in Linux to follow though? Specifically after reviewing this some more, I think what Cindy is trying to do is actually provisioning as opposed to programming. -- MST
