On 8/23/2023 2:19 PM, Donald Hunter wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> On 8/23/2023 4:41 AM, Donald Hunter wrote: >>> +--- >>> +$id: http://kernel.org/schemas/netlink/genetlink-legacy.yaml# >>> +$schema: https://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema >>> + >>> +# Common defines >>> +$defs: >>> + uint: >>> + type: integer >>> + minimum: 0 >>> + len-or-define: >>> + type: [ string, integer ] >>> + pattern: ^[0-9A-Za-z_]+( - 1)?$ >>> + minimum: 0 >>> + >>> +# Schema for specs >>> +title: Protocol >>> +description: Specification of a genetlink protocol >> >> If this is for netlink-raw, shouldn't this not say genetlink? Same >> elsewhere? or am I misunderstanding something? > > It's a good question. The schema definitions are currently strict > supersets of genetlink: > > genetlink <= genetlink-c <= genetlink-legacy <= netlink-raw > > As you noted below, there's only 2 additions needed for the netlink raw > families, protonum and mcast-group value. > > I would be happy to change the description and other references to > genetlink in this spec, but I'd like to hear Jakub's thoughts about > minimal modification vs a more thorough rewording. Perhaps a middle > ground would be to extend the top-level description to say "genetlink or > raw netlink" and qualify that all mention of genetlink also applies to > raw netlink. > > Either way, I just noticed that the schema $id does need to be updated. > Ok, ya lets wait for Jakub's opinion. I think the clarification would be good since at least conceptually genetlink is distinct to me from netlink raw, so it feels a bit weird. Either way, they share far more in common than I had originally realized, so its not a huge deal. Thanks for the clarification! >>> +type: object >>> +required: [ name, doc, attribute-sets, operations ] >>> +additionalProperties: False >>> +properties: >>> + name: >>> + description: Name of the genetlink family. >>> + type: string >>> + doc: >>> + type: string >>> + version: >>> + description: Generic Netlink family version. Default is 1. >>> + type: integer >>> + minimum: 1 >>> + protocol: >>> + description: Schema compatibility level. Default is "genetlink". >>> + enum: [ genetlink, genetlink-c, genetlink-legacy, netlink-raw ] # Trim >>> + # Start netlink-raw >> >> I guess the netlink raw part is only below this? Or does netlink raw >> share more of the generic netlink code than I thought? > > Raw netlink is, so far, the same as genetlink-legacy with the addition > of hard-coded protocol ids. > Right that makes sense why this shares so much. Thanks, Jake
