Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/7] netdev-genl: create a simple family for netdev stuff

From: Lorenzo Bianconi <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:29:55 +0100

> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 00:00:15 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> > > FWIW I'm not 100% sure if we should scope the family to all of netdev
> > > or just xdp. Same for the name of the op, should we call the op dev_get
> > > or dev_xdp_get..  
> > 
> > is it likely we are going to add non-xdp info here in the near future? If not
> > I would say we can target just xdp for the moment.
> 
> What brought it to mind for me was offloads like the NVMe/DDP for
> instance. Whether that stuff should live in ethtool or a netdev
> family is a bit unclear.

ack, let's keep netdev in this case.

> 
> > > These defines don't belong in uAPI. Especially the use of BIT().  
> > 
> > since netdev xdp_features is a bitmask, can we use 'flags' as type for definitions in
> > netdev.yaml so we can get rid of this BIT() definitions for both user and
> > kernel space?
> 
> If you have no use for the bit numbers - definitely.

ack

Regards,
Lorenzo