[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices



Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 04:41:54AM CEST, jasowang redhat com wrote:
>
>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 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

Jason, what is your use case?



>
>Thanks
>
>
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Yan
>> 
>



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]