On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 12:23:05 +0200 Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > IMO it does not break user space when slcan gets the common naming > schema for CAN interface names. For what it's worth, slcan provides a specific ioctl to resolve from (tty fd) to (netdev name). As far as I can see, any sane program should use this API to find whatever device it has created, irrespective of the netdev name. @ Marc: slcand and slcan_attach in can-utils do not depend on the slcanX name, as far as I can see. They are the main interfaces to slcan, and apart from that I can only think of scripts doing netlink stuff and scanning for slcanX. Does this change your opinion, or is breaking such scripts already a step too far? I'm thinking that in other circumstances, I've had cases where devices were numbered differently just because they enumerated faster or slower at different boots, or with other kernel versions, or because of media inserted, etc. - though renumbering is of course one step less than changing the prefix. > We had the same thing with 'eth0' which is now named enblablabla or > 'wlan0' now named wlp2s0. Actually, the kernel still calls them ethX and wlanX. It's systemd+udev that renames them to the "unique" names afterwards. It's an extra step that happens in userspace. udev is immensely useful, but also great stuff for race conditions :) Max
