Bug 2142003

Summary:	Add "controller" field to interface to attach to bridge, bond.
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9	Reporter:	Gris Ge <fge>
Component:	nmstate	Assignee:	Gris Ge <fge>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Mingyu Shi <mshi>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	9.1	CC:	ellorent, ferferna, jiji, jishi, mshi, network-qe, sfaye, till
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Triaged
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	nmstate-2.2.2-0.alpha.20221201.el9	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	2141999	Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-05-09 07:31:50 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:	2141999
Bug Blocks:

Description Gris Ge 2022-11-11 11:37:30 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #2141999 +++

Description of problem:

Right now adding a port a bridge means modify the "port" field of the bridge so the previous port has to be also included or they will be removed.

We can add a "controller" field to interfaces to they just  get attached to the bridge, port.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible: Always


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Add a interface as a new bridge port modifying the bridge "port" field with just the interface

Actual results:
The other ports get removed


Expected results:
It should merge it with the ports or we should have a controller field at interfaces.


Additional info:

Comment 1 Fernando F. Mancera 2022-11-15 15:39:00 UTC

I think this is against the declarative and idempotent design. The Nmstate output state won't be the same than the desired state. IMO, this fits better in NMPolicy as they do not follow these rules. What do you think?

Comment 2 Gris Ge 2022-11-16 03:22:20 UTC

I don't get it why it cannot be declarative and idempotent, could you elaborate?


```yaml
---
interfaces:
- name: eth1
  state: up
  controller: br0
```

Comment 6 Mingyu Shi 2023-02-03 06:56:15 UTC

Verified with:
nmstate-2.2.5-1.el9.x86_64
nispor-1.2.9-1.el9.x86_64
NetworkManager-1.41.90-1.el9.x86_64
openvswitch2.15-2.15.0-79.el9fdp.x86_64
DISTRO=RHEL-9.2.0-20230127.12

Comment 8 errata-xmlrpc 2023-05-09 07:31:50 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (nmstate bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2023:2190