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

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Roland Dreier
Date: Thursday, June 5, 2008 - 1:47 pm

> > 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?  What advantages does that
give?

 - R.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[ofa-general] [PATCH v3 00/13] QLogic VNIC Driver , Ramachandra K, (Thu May 29, 2:53 am)
[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 01/13] QLogic VNIC: Driver - n ..., Stephen Hemminger, (Thu May 29, 10:27 am)
[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 08/13] QLogic VNIC: sysfs inte ..., Stephen Hemminger, (Thu May 29, 10:30 am)
Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 01/13] QLogic VNIC: Driver ..., Stephen Hemminger, (Tue Jun 3, 10:51 am)
Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 08/13] QLogic VNIC: sysfs ..., Stephen Hemminger, (Thu Jun 5, 10:01 am)
Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH v3 08/13] QLogic VNIC: sysfs ..., Roland Dreier, (Thu Jun 5, 1:47 pm)