2013/12/12 John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx>: > On 12/12/2013 9:28 AM, David Miller wrote: >> >> From: Stefan Raspl <raspl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 14:57:18 +0100 >> >>> I agree, netlink would certainly be nice. But ethtool is the >>> de-facto standard for now, and there doesn't seem to be a >>> netlink-based alternative in sight - or is there? >>> Offering a netlink based tool seems to be a different discussion, >>> and if that takes shape, existing ethtool functionality (including >>> this series) can and should be migrated. >> >> >> I completely disagree, ethtool is not de-facto for anything in >> particular. It's suitable for some things, not suitable for >> others. >> >> And just because it's used for other aspects of a device's >> configuration doesn't mean that netlink isn't appropriate for other >> apsects. > > > Just to elaborate... > > Any application using lldp information will want to get events when > TLVs change. Maybe you can contrive ethtool to do this but its going to > be ugly. Netlink can support multicast events and applications can > register for them. Also netlink's TLV format matches nicely with LLDPs > TLV format. ethtool and netlink usually intersect for a few bits of information such as link status for instance. It is useful to have this information twice, with ethtool as a debugging aid, and via netlink to take appropriate actions. Maybe we just need to be clear on what needs to be present in ethtool only (configuration, static information) and see on a case-by-case what needs to be present in both ethtool and netlink? > > If you push an ethtool interface now we get stuck with an interface > that is only useful in a very narrow use case. And netlink interfaces > are relatively easy to construct so lets do this right the first time. > I also happen to maintain lldpad and would be happy to plug in support > for this via netlink so we can push firmware and software based agent > LLDP info up to libvirt/network manager whatever in a consistent way. > Similarly other existing lldp agents could do the same. > > Thanks, > .John -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
