Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:02:34AM CEST, step...@networkplumber.org wrote: >On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:55:10 +0100 >Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us> wrote: > >> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com> >> >> This patchset resolves 2 issues we have right now: >> 1) There are many netdevices / ports in the system, for port, pf, vf >> represenatation but the user has no way to see which is which > >There already are a lot of attributes, adding more doesn't necessarily >help make things clearer.
How elso you distinguish pfrep/vfrep/cpuport/etc? > >> 2) The ndo_get_phys_port_name is implemented in each driver separatelly, >> which may lead to inconsistent names between drivers. > >Why not address that problem. My concern is that your new attribute >will have the same problem. I try to address that... > >Also adding pf and vfNNN on the name will make the already tightly squeezed >interface name length a real problem. I have had arguments with people >trying use VLAN 4000 and standard naming policy. Which means you really >can't go that long. Understood. However, I just do what is already done in nfp for example.
