Re: device compatibility interface for live migration with assigned devices

[Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>]

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.

Thanks
Yan