From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] ethtool: (uapi) Add ETHTOOL_PHY_GTUNABLE and ETHTOOL_PHY_STUNABLE Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:29:35 +0100 Message-ID: <20161104122935.GL13959@lunn.ch> References: <1478255742-25693-1-git-send-email-allan.nielsen@microsemi.com> <1478255742-25693-2-git-send-email-allan.nielsen@microsemi.com> <20161104120343.GI13959@lunn.ch> <20161104121841.GA5676@microsemi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, f.fainelli@gmail.com, raju.lakkaraju@microsemi.com, cphealy@gmail.com, robh@kernel.org To: "Allan W. Nielsen" Return-path: Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:36828 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933163AbcKDM3h (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2016 08:29:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161104121841.GA5676@microsemi.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > It was "just" to mimic how "tunable_type_id/ETHTOOL_TUNABLE_UNSPEC" (and other) > is done. Yes, i know. I'm wondering about cult cargo programming... > The thinking was that we did not want an "ID" of zero do to anything - because > that could mean the programmer had forgot to set the field... Seems reasonable. Leave it as is. Andrew