[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v6 01/11] igc: Add skeletal frame for Intel(R) 2.5G Ethernet Controller support.

[Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com>]

On Aug 23 08:12, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 16:03 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Aug 23 10:05, Sasha Neftin wrote:
> > > This patch adds the beginning framework onto which I am going to
> > add
> > > the igc driver which supports the Intel(R) I225-LM/I225-V 2.5G
> > > Ethernet Controller.
> > 
> > I'm curious.  The code looks very much like the igb code.  Wouldn't
> > it
> > be simpler and less error prone to add these new NICs to igb, rather
> > than creating a new driver by (mostly) copying the code from igb?
> > 
> > What's the idea behind this?
> 
> This new driver is for a new upcoming client part, not server (which is
> the igb driver).  Yes, the way that this new client part does resemble
> how the igb driver operates, but this new client part will not have
> many of the advance features (like SRIOV) that igb uses.  We also want
> to keep the igb driver strictly for the 1GbE server devices.

Ok, thanks, but I'm still a bit puzzled.

What about E1000_DEV_ID_I354_BACKPLANE_2_5GBPS?  The later supposedly
already provides 2.5G within igb.  Is that the server part compared
to igc?  Otherwise, what's the equivalent server part providing 2.5G?

> > > Sasha Neftin (v2):
> > > update module author, copyright and licence header
> > > cosmetic changes
> > > 
> > > Sasha Neftin (v3):
> > > remove unused header files
> > > 
> > > Sasha Neftin (v4):
> > > update brand name
> > > fix syntax by input from community
> > > replace e1000_ prefix with igc_ prefix
> > 
> > In theory this is neither necessary, nor does it actually help.
> > By keeping the e1000 prefixes it's much easier to compare to the
> > other, already existing drivers.
> > 
> > > Sasha Neftin (v5):
> > > no changes
> > > 
> > > Sasha Neftin (v6):
> > > no changes
> > 
> > Is that an oversight?  If there are no changes in v5 and v6, why
> > do we have them?!?
> 
> Sasha is just noting that this particular patch did not change in v6,
> but other patches did have changes in this new version of the series.

Oh, right, thanks for the clarification.


Corinna
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/attachments/20180823/8490f85d/attachment.asc>