[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [Bridge] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Allow full bridge configuration via sysfs
    On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
    David Miller <> wrote:

    > From: Bill Nottingham <>
    > Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 17:34:20 -0400
    > > I could look at wireless network configuration, but I doubt that's going to
    > > help your argument.
    > Just like any system with age, we have a lot of legacy to
    > convert over. But it will happen.
    > > That being said, how is moving from adding a bonding slave from:
    > > echo "+eth0" > /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/slaves to:
    > > to:
    > >
    > >
    > > a worthwhile improvement for the admin? Let's see, a kernel-userspace
    > > protocol with magic message formats. Hey, we reinvented ioctl!
    > >
    > > Why, if netlink is the standard (and it's been around for a long
    > > damn time), was sysfs configuration for bonding added in 2005? Why
    > > was bridge configuration added in 2005, and *extended* in 2006 and
    > > 2007? Why were the user-space tools such as brctl ported from ioctl
    > > to sysfs?
    > Because often a lot of shit slips in when someone who understands
    > the ramifications is too busy or on vacation.
    > We do want everything to be netlink based.
    > Why?
    > Because it means that you can run one monitoring tool to listen
    > for netlink events and report them to the user for diagnosis.
    > It means that network configuration events can be sent over
    > the wire and used remotely at some point.
    > The latter can never happen as long as we keep adding ad-hoc
    > config stuff.

    There are always historical reasons. In this case it was because I knew
    more about sysfs than netlink, and there was no netlink interface for managing
    interfaces back in 2005. Sysfs is okay for simple stuff (set forward-delay to 10seconds),
    but it falls down when anything interesting and transactional happens. Think of
    sysfs as more an extension of per-device sysctl's or module parameters, rather
    than a good configuration interface.

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-08 00:07    [W:0.023 / U:0.208 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site