Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...>
Cc: Herbert Rosmanith <kernel@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Thursday, August 2, 2007 - 9:07 am

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

That was my argument - there should be no way to *change* the name, but
to give an alias(es) - entirely different thing.

Yes, if a device is replugged during that one second, it's another
at least "instance" of that device - similar to 'ifindex' field in
interface description (not shown by ifconfig but shown by `ip link'),
or to usb endpoint numbers which gets incremented each time one
plug something in.

But as long as the device is connected, it should have the same
name - that's my key point.  You may change its aliases as you
wish, but not the "primary name".

[]

Again, this is questionable - the integration part, right way to it,
that is.

If - recalling my "naming scheme" with kernel ethX (which may change each
boot or even at runtime, OR may not change at all if I don't replug
devices), and nicN which is based on particular device's MAC address, --
I configured dhcp to listen on eth0, I assume it's the first network
card found by the system, whatever it is.  In this case, if I replaced
the card (because previous one was faulty etc), it will continue to
work (provided no other renames was done) without renames done by
udev, and will break with current udev behaviour.  But if I configured
dhcp to listen on *this* NIC with *this* serial number and MAC address,
current udev behaviour is right - the system just assumes that this
particular card isn't here (yet?) and hence dhcp shouldn't run on it.

You see - we again have two names - "first interface found by kernel"
and "this particular card with this serial number", and both of them
are useful.

Partially this issue can be solved by - say - kudzu asking for a
name if it finds new hardware (we'll answer it with the name our
replaced card had) - but such behaviour is out of the question
because system startup scripts should not generally ask "random
questions".

/mjt
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Herbert Rosmanith, (Thu Aug 2, 6:20 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 6:44 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Michael Tokarev, (Thu Aug 2, 6:26 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Herbert Rosmanith, (Thu Aug 2, 6:42 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 6:49 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Herbert Rosmanith, (Thu Aug 2, 7:12 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Herbert Rosmanith, (Thu Aug 2, 6:56 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 7:47 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Michael Tokarev, (Thu Aug 2, 9:07 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 9:38 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 2:37 pm)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Kay Sievers, (Thu Aug 2, 6:00 pm)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 6:39 pm)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Kay Sievers, (Thu Aug 2, 6:49 pm)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Fri Aug 3, 3:46 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Herbert Rosmanith, (Thu Aug 2, 8:00 am)
Re: VIA EPIA EK: strange eth dev numbering, Jan Engelhardt, (Thu Aug 2, 8:06 am)