On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 7:40 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 04:35:10PM CEST, roopa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Steve Lin <steven.lin1@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Adds a devlink command for getting & setting device configuration >>> parameters, and enumerates a bunch of those parameters as devlink >>> attributes. Also introduces an attribute that can be set by a >>> driver to indicate that the config change doesn't take effect >>> until the next restart (as in the case of the bnxt driver changes >>> in this patchset, for which all the configuration changes affect NVM >>> only, and aren't loaded until the next restart.) >>> >>> bnxt driver patches make use of these new devlink cmds/attributes. >>> >>> Steve Lin (3): >>> devlink: Add config parameter get/set operations >>> bnxt: Move generic devlink code to new file >>> bnxt: Add devlink support for config get/set >>> >> >>Is the goal here to move all ethtool operations to devlink (I saw some >>attrs related to speed etc). ?. >>We do need to move ethtool attrs to netlink and devlink is a good >>place (and of-course leave the current ethtool api around for backward >>compatibility). > > We need to make sure we are not moving things to devlink which don't > belong there. All options that use "netdev" as a handle should go into > rtnetlink instead. > Any reason you want to keep that restriction ?. FWIS, devlink is a driver api just like ethtool is. and ethtool needs to move to netlink soon...and It would be better to not put the rtnl_lock burden on ethtool driver operations. Instead of adding yet another driver api, extending devlink seems like a great fit to me.
