On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 08:52:25AM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 07:25:29AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 02:37:06PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 11:29:38AM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote:
> > >
> > > > One question I have - what is the recommended way of replacing
> > > > those module parameters, if we need to flexibly parameterize
> > > > things from user land? For the rxe driver, I see the usage of
> > > > module_param_cb, but this probably is not what we want in the
> > > > long run? Would a sysctl be appropriate, or a char device
> > > > (we may need to pass strings like interface names), or configfs?
> > >
> > > Probably something like 'rdmatool interface attach' eg cause it to
> > > create using the RDMA netlink protocol.
> > >
> > > Leon?
> >
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg58498.html
> > "It looks like "ip" tool can be good fit ..."
> >
> > ip link add ...
> > ip link set ...
>
> ip link adds netdevs, so that doesn't quite feel right for adding rdma
> devices???

It depends on the add/delete order, currently we are adding
RDMA (RXE/SoftiWARP) device to existing netdev. Will it make
sense to reverse order and add/delete netdev device for the
existing RDMA (RXE/SoftiWARP) device?

In this "reverse order", ip tool can be right tool.

Thanks

>
> Jason