On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 18:16:30 -0800, Siwei Liu wrote: > > The plan is to remove the delay and do the naming in the kernel. > > This was suggested by Lennart since udev is only doing naming policy > > because kernel names were not repeatable. > > > > This makes the VF show up as "ethN_vf" on Hyper-V which is user friendly. > > > > Patch is pending. > > While it's good to show VF with specific naming to indicate > enslavement, I wonder wouldn't it be better to hide this netdev at all > from the user space? IMHO this extra device is useless when being > enslaved and we may delegate controls (e.g. ethtool) over to the > para-virtual device instead? That way it's possible to eliminate the > possibility of additional udev setup or modification? > > I'm not sure if this is consistent with Windows guest or not, but I > don't find it _Linux_ user friendly that ethtool doesn't work on the > composite interface any more, and I have to end up with finding out > the correct enslaved VF I must operate on.
Hiding "low level" netdevs comes up from time to time, and is more widely applicable than just to VF bonds. We should find a generic solution to that problem.
