Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 04:31:04PM CEST, pabeni@redhat.com wrote:

On 7/31/24 23:13, Donald Hunter wrote:

quoted

Paolo Abeni [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

diff --git a/Documentation/netlink/specs/shaper.yaml b/Documentation/netlink/specs/shaper.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..7327f5596fdb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/netlink/specs/shaper.yaml

It's probably more user-friendly to use the same filename as the spec
name, so net-shaper.yaml

No big objection on my side, but if we enforce 'Name:' to be $(basename $file
.yaml), the 'Name' field becomes redundant.

I agree with Donald, better to stay consistent.

[...]

quoted

quoted

+    render-max: true
+    entries:
+      - name: unspec
+        doc: The scope is not specified

What are the semantics of 'unspec' ? When can it be used?

I guess at this point it can be dropped. It was introduced in a previous
incarnation to represent the port parent - the port does not have a parent,
being the root of the hierarchy.

quoted

quoted

+      -
+        name: port
+        doc: The root for the whole H/W
+      -
+        name: netdev
+        doc: The main shaper for the given network device.

What are the semantic differences between netdev and port?

I'm happy that I'm not the only one in the dark :)

netdev == Linux network device
port == wire plug

quoted

quoted

+      -
+        name: queue
+        doc: The shaper is attached to the given device queue.
+      -
+        name: detached
+        doc: |
+             The shaper is not attached to any user-visible network
+             device component and allows nesting and grouping of
+             queues or others detached shapers.

I assume that shapers are always owned by the netdev regardless of
attach status?

But is it a "status"? It is a scope, can't change. I see you probably
got the same confusion as I got, expecting that this can be attached
somehow.

If you mean that it's up to the netdev clean them up on (netdev) removal,
yes.

[...]