udev/net_id: avoid slot based names only for single function devices #22844
Conversation
|
I think it is better to add a new NAMING_ flag for this change. |
Ok, I will add that. |
|
patch looks ok, but please add a new naming scheme flag for that. Also please update the log message a bit according to the new conditionalization. |
poettering
added
the
reviewed/needs-rework 🔨
msekletar
force-pushed
the
net-id-pci-multifunction-fix
branch
from
184ff44
to
3ea076d
Compare
msekletar
removed
the
reviewed/needs-rework 🔨
|
Updated. @yuwata @poettering PTAL. |
poettering
added
the
good-to-merge/waiting-for-ci 👍
keszybz
added
good-to-merge/with-minor-suggestions
and removed
good-to-merge/waiting-for-ci 👍
|
I think it'll be easier to grok if the name is reversed. But if you disagree, ignore my comment. |
|
@keszybz, OK, so let's rename the option. But I am adding dont-merge label because I got some reports from Red Hat QE folks about issues with this change while they were doing testing internally. |
msekletar
force-pushed
the
net-id-pci-multifunction-fix
branch
from
3ea076d
to
4fbc670
Compare
|
This is now updated and should be ready to merge but please wait until we figure out issues regarding testing of this change. I will drop "dont-merge" label once this is fully ready. |
msekletar
force-pushed
the
net-id-pci-multifunction-fix
branch
from
4fbc670
to
01737dc
Compare
|
I've force pushed my branch with small update to manual page (removed erroneous dot at the end of added paragraph which was causing man rendering problem). |
If we have two or more devices that share the same slot but they are also multifunction then it is OK to use the slot information even if it is the same for all of them. Name conflict will be avoided because we will append function number and form names like, ens1f1, ens1f2...
msekletar
force-pushed
the
net-id-pci-multifunction-fix
branch
from
01737dc
to
0aea77e
Compare
|
@poettering I've fixed the typo and marked the comment from @keszybz as addressed. |
|
@msekletar Is the tag 'dont-merge' still needed? |
|
RH networking QE folks got back to me and are reporting that change is fine. |
If we have two or more devices that share the same slot but they are
also multifunction then it is OK to use the slot information even if it
is the same for all of them. Name conflict will be avoided because we
will append function number and form names like, ens1f1, ens1f2...