From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: ethtool TODO list - additional info Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:12:52 -0400 Message-ID: <20160712181251.GA22464@tuxdriver.com> References: <20160712175558.GB1799@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jiri Pirko , Ben Hutchings , netdev To: Jorge Alberto Garcia Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:39130 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750776AbcGLSPP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:15:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 01:04:52PM -0500, Jorge Alberto Garcia wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > > Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 05:37:42PM CEST, jorge.garcia.gonzalez@gmail.com wrote: > >>Hi ! > >> > >>Some days ago, Jiri Pirko was talking about some next steps to > >>implement for ethtool. > >> > >> I haven't seen any follow up since ethtool's maintainer change. Can we have > >>additional details about these ? > >> > >>- libethtool - API > >>- generic netlink > > > > Yep, exactly, no reply. Apparently nobody really want to do any initiative > > here, and I'm lacking time to do it :( > > > > That's fine, I already got a git repo, I'm trying to understand what > 'use generic netlink' means. > > This is a piece of what grep got me on iproute git repo (I'm still > trying to understand) > grep -i netlink -r iproute2/ > iproute2/bridge/mdb.c:#include "libnetlink.h" > iproute2/bridge/vlan.c:#include "libnetlink.h" > ... > .. The general notion would be to replace the current ioctl-based ethtool API with one that is based on netlink, like many of the other networking APIs. I'm fine with the general idea of that, but so far I haven't heard a strong case for why it is necessary. It certainly doesn't seem urgent to me -- if someone disagrees, then please explain! John > > > > > >>- sub commands syntax > >>- TODO/bugzilla > >> > >> > >>On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> > >>>>> I was thinking of adding a TODO file to the repository, but it's really > >>>>> for the new maintainer to decide what to do. So here's my list as a > >>>>> suggestion: > >>>>> > >>>>> * Add regression test coverage for all sub-commands with complex logic > >>>>> > >>>>> * Internationalise output and error messages > >>>>> > >>>>> * Build a libethtool that handles all the API quirks and fallbacks for > >>>>> old kernel versions. This might help people writing language > >>>>> bindings or other utilities that use the ethtool API. > >>>>> > >>>>> * Provide a 'cleaned up' ethtool (under some other name) that has: > >>>>> - More conventional sub-command syntax, i.e. no '-'/'--' prefix > >>>>> - More consistent output formatting > >>>> > >>>>That seems like a reasonable start for a TODO list. I'll bet there > >>>>are a few people out there with other suggestions as well...? > >>> > >>> Before that, I would like to see ethtool migrate to use generic > >>> netlink. Then, the new tool would be needed anyway, should exist within > >>> iproute2 package and have similar command line syntax. > >>> > >>> I have some ideas about the gennetlink ethtool, have to find some time > >>> to implement some initial part of it. > -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.