On 2020/8/5 上午10:16, Yan Zhao wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:22:15AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 2020/8/5 上午12:35, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> [sorry about not chiming in earlier]
>>
>> On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 16:05:03 +0800
>> Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao(a)intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 04:23:21PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
>> (...)
>>
>>>> Based on the feedback we've received, the previously proposed
interface
>>>> is not viable. I think there's agreement that the user needs to be
>>>> able to parse and interpret the version information. Using json seems
>>>> viable, but I don't know if it's the best option. Is there any
>>>> precedent of markup strings returned via sysfs we could follow?
>> I don't think encoding complex information in a sysfs file is a viable
>> approach. Quoting Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.rst:
>>
>> "Attributes should be ASCII text files, preferably with only one value
>> per file. It is noted that it may not be efficient to contain only one
>> value per file, so it is socially acceptable to express an array of
>> values of the same type.
>> Mixing types, expressing multiple lines of data, and doing fancy
>> formatting of data is heavily frowned upon."
>>
>> Even though this is an older file, I think these restrictions still
>> apply.
>
> +1, that's another reason why devlink(netlink) is better.
>
hi Jason,
do you have any materials or sample code about devlink, so we can have a good
study of it?
I found some kernel docs about it but my preliminary study didn't show me the
advantage of devlink.
CC Jiri and Parav for a better answer for this.
My understanding is that the following advantages are obvious (as I
replied in another thread):
- existing users (NIC, crypto, SCSI, ib), mature and stable
- much better error reporting (ext_ack other than string or errno)
- namespace aware
- do not couple with kobject
Thanks
Thanks
Yan