> -----Original Message----- > From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx> [..] > Well, I don't really need those in the phys_port_name, mainly simply because > they would not fit. However, I believe that you should fillup the PF/VF devlink > netlink attrs. > > Note that we are not talking here about the actual mdev, but rather > devlink_port associated with this mdev. And devlink port should have this info. > > > > > >> >What in hypothetical case, mdev is not on top of PCI... > >> > >> Okay, let's go hypothetical. In that case, it is going to be on top > >> of something else, wouldn't it? > >Yes, it will be. But just because it is on top of something, doesn't mean we > include the whole parent dev, its bridge, its rc hierarchy here. > >There should be a need. > >It was needed in PF/VF case due to overlapping numbers of VFs via single > devlink instance. You probably missed my reply to Jakub. > > Sure. Again, I don't really care about having that in phys_port_name. > But please fillup the attrs. > Ah ok. but than that would be optional attribute? Because you can have non pci based mdev, though it doesn't exist today along with devlink to my knowledge.
