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 15:18:28 -0400 Message-ID: <20160712191828.GB22464@tuxdriver.com> References: <20160712175558.GB1799@nanopsycho.orion> <20160712181251.GA22464@tuxdriver.com> <20160712.113406.1402587122290887574.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: jorge.garcia.gonzalez@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us, ben@decadent.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:39768 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751405AbcGLTaU (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:30:20 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160712.113406.1402587122290887574.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:34:06AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: "John W. Linville" > Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:12:52 -0400 > > > I haven't heard a strong case for why it is necessary. > > Stats on large scale setups/systems is problematic and ethtool > is a part of that problem. > > Extensibility in general suffers because of the ioctl() interface as > well. > > For getting ethtool settings or stats, we have no clean filtering > mechanism. > > I could go on and on... > > I think before any new features are added to ethtool, we move over to > the netlink based interface and lock the existing ioctl() API in stone. OK, then I'll start looking at this. Thanks for providing some clarity! John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.