On (08/22/07 16:37), Peter Memishian wrote:
> 
> So what keeps the driver's private property names from colliding
> non-private names that are later added?  

It doesn't. As Section 3.2.1 of the Brussels design doc says, the 
property names are prioritized as:

1. first search public props
2. if not found, try the wifi props
3. if not found, try private props.

The idea is to treat Private props as experimental, second-class citizens.
A driver that wants to venture in this area should first make sure
there's no name-space collision with public props (which will be 
fully documented in the dladm(1m) man page). 

> (That's one of the intents of the
> the link_ prefix.  The other is making the division between private and
> public property names an explicit part of the administrative experience,
> so the admin's expectations remain appropriately set.)

I'm not averse to it, but adding the link_ prefix for Private props (or
vice-versa) places an artificial burden on Public props - for example
many MII props are already prefixed with "link_". If we choose to make
these Public ethernet props (as Brussels has done) we'd now have
to strip off the "link_" prefix.

In the general case, if a driver comes up with some prop like "link_foo"
that ends up being a good candidate for a public prop, we'd have
to go through the exercise of stripping off the link_ to promote it.

--Sowmini


Reply via email to