Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 08/13] QLogic VNIC: sysfs interface implementation for the driver

From: Patrick McHardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:54:49 +0200

Roland Dreier wrote:
>  > > There is nothing stopping adding a well designed alternate interface.
>  > > Either netlink or ioctl's are okay. As long as it is 32/64 bit clean.
>
>  > From a quick look it seems it should use rtnl_link instead
>  > of adding yet another private sysfs interface.
>
> This seems crazy -- why do we want to push things towards the complexity
> of rtnl_link instead of a simple text-based interface that can be
> trivial used with 'echo' from the shell?

Its not complicated at all. Ability to use "echo" seems like a
pretty poor argument to me.

>   What advantages does that give?

- atomic configuration changes
- atomic configuration dumps
- configuration change notifications
- same interface as for all other network-related configurations
- easily extensible
- not yet another private driver interface
- not text based, which makes it a lot more convenient for using in programs