> From: yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2022 2:02 AM > To: Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxx>; dust.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Zhu Yanjun > <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx>; jgg@xxxxxxxx; leon@xxxxxxxxxx; linux- > rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] RDMA net namespace > > October 27, 2022 11:48 AM, "Parav Pandit" <parav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> From: yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 11:39 PM > >> > >> October 27, 2022 11:21 AM, "Parav Pandit" <parav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> From: yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 11:17 PM > >> > >> October 27, 2022 11:10 AM, "Parav Pandit" <parav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> From: yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx <yanjun.zhu@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 11:08 PM > >> > >> October 27, 2022 11:01 AM, "Parav Pandit" <parav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> From: Dust Li <dust.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 10:31 PM > >> > >> 2. else we are in > >> exclusive mode. When the corresponding netdevice of the RoCE or iWarp > >> device is moved from one net namespace to another, we move the > RDMA > >> device into that net namespace > >> > >> What do you think ? > >> > >> No. one device is not supposed to move other devices. > >> Every device is independent that should be moved by explicit command. > >> > >> Can you show us where we can find this rule "Every device is > >> independent that should be moved by explicit command."? > >> > >> Also changes like above breaks the existing orchestration, it no-go. > >> > > And I do not find the rule that you mentioned. > > > There is no Linux kernel subsystem or module to my knowledge that > > attempt to move multiple devices using single command. > > When user executes command , user explicitly give device name "foo", > only "foo" should move. > > Other loosely coupled device whose name is not specified in the ip > > command which has a different life cycle should not move along with "foo". > > > > You are trying to define the new rule that breaks the existing ABI and > > the iproute2 (ip and rdma) command semantics. > > It is implicit that when command is issued on device A, operate on > > device A. This is part of > > iproute2 functioning. > > About iproute2, I read this link > https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/iproute2#documentation > > There is no rules that you mentioned. > > This rule is defined explicitly or implicitly? > Wiki pages links are not the documentation. Man pages of the iproute2 is documentation of iproute2 at [1] and [2]. [1] https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/rdma-system.8.html [2] https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/rdma-dev.8.html As I explained, the explicit rule that you are looking for that say "when I modify device foo, it can also modifies the device bar". Because no part of the Linux kernel does that usually, unless the device is representor/control object etc or has parent/child relationship. It is fundamental to a command definition, not a matter of explicit or implicit. And clearly in this discussion foo and bar are loosely coupled network devices, one is not controlling the other. Also, a rdma device is attached to multiple net devices, primary and other upper devices such as vlan, macvlan etc.
