On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 02:35:16PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Using generic netlink instead of sysfs for this makes a lot of sense, > but it may be a bit odd to use it outside the networking area. > I've been struggling with the same in another non-networking use-case > as well.
Agreed, and the series shows the friction. The namespace handling is nominal, and CAP_NET_ADMIN as the mutation gate is another borrowed part of the model. I went into that in more detail in the reply to Jason. > - One character device per registered instance, not one global family. > Access control is the file: udev rules, ACLs, an fd passed into > a container. The fd-based access and event model addresses real problems with one global family and one multicast group. The main question is what the CTLV instance would represent. A fabric can span multiple devices and has its own lifetime. An endpoint can also be detached from a fabric with fabric-id 0 and continue to exist. A character device per accelerator would not provide the same global view as the current family. Can a CTLV instance represent a multi-device fabric or the global fabric registry rather than one physical device? > Would this make sense to use for you? In principle, yes. I cannot base this series on an out-of-tree pre-RFC, but the fabric, endpoint, port and peer model is separate from the current serialization. Changing transports would be more than regeneration, so I will read the draft before saying more. Thanks, Konstantin
