From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 2/6] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETEECSTATE message to get SyncE status
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:41:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211116154111.GF6326@breakpoint.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW5PR11MB58124A70268058505368A5C8EA999@MW5PR11MB5812.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Machnikowski, Maciej <maciej.machnikowski@intel.com> wrote:
> > More importantly, why is this added to rtnetlink (routing sockets)?
> > It appears to be unrelated?
> >
> > Looks like this should be in ethtool (it has netlink api nowadays) or
> > devlink.
>
> We identified it as a generic place in previous RFCs.
Doesn't answer my question. EECSTATE doesn't appear to be related to
anything else thats currently exposed via rtnetlink from a conceptional
point of view.
> Ethtool calls are not
> available in non-ethernet packet networks
Thats news to me. ethtool ops are linked via netdevice struct.
> and the concept of that functionality
> is - any packet network can implement it - SONET, GPON or even wireless.
Ethtool ops expose a wide range of low-level functions not related to
ethernet, e.g. eeprom dump, interrupt coalescing settings of and so on
and so forth.
But hey, if net maintainers are ok with rtnetlink...
I just feel putting synce interaction in rtnetlink is arbitrary
and bad precendence.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: "Machnikowski, Maciej" <maciej.machnikowski@intel.com>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
"richardcochran@gmail.com" <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
"abyagowi@fb.com" <abyagowi@fb.com>,
"Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
"idosch@idosch.org" <idosch@idosch.org>,
"mkubecek@suse.cz" <mkubecek@suse.cz>,
"saeed@kernel.org" <saeed@kernel.org>,
"michael.chan@broadcom.com" <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
"petrm@nvidia.com" <petrm@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/6] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETEECSTATE message to get SyncE status
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:41:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211116154111.GF6326@breakpoint.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW5PR11MB58124A70268058505368A5C8EA999@MW5PR11MB5812.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Machnikowski, Maciej <maciej.machnikowski@intel.com> wrote:
> > More importantly, why is this added to rtnetlink (routing sockets)?
> > It appears to be unrelated?
> >
> > Looks like this should be in ethtool (it has netlink api nowadays) or
> > devlink.
>
> We identified it as a generic place in previous RFCs.
Doesn't answer my question. EECSTATE doesn't appear to be related to
anything else thats currently exposed via rtnetlink from a conceptional
point of view.
> Ethtool calls are not
> available in non-ethernet packet networks
Thats news to me. ethtool ops are linked via netdevice struct.
> and the concept of that functionality
> is - any packet network can implement it - SONET, GPON or even wireless.
Ethtool ops expose a wide range of low-level functions not related to
ethernet, e.g. eeprom dump, interrupt coalescing settings of and so on
and so forth.
But hey, if net maintainers are ok with rtnetlink...
I just feel putting synce interaction in rtnetlink is arbitrary
and bad precendence.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-16 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-10 11:44 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 0/6] Add RTNL interface for SyncE Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 1/6] ice: add support detecting features based on netlist Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 2/6] rtnetlink: Add new RTM_GETEECSTATE message to get SyncE status Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-11 16:01 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Sabrina Dubroca
2021-11-11 16:01 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2021-11-11 16:22 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Florian Westphal
2021-11-11 16:22 ` Florian Westphal
2021-11-16 14:40 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-16 14:40 ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-16 15:41 ` Florian Westphal [this message]
2021-11-16 15:41 ` Florian Westphal
2021-11-16 19:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2021-11-16 19:30 ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-11-16 14:37 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-16 14:37 ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-10 11:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 3/6] ice: add support for reading SyncE DPLL state Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 4/6] rtnetlink: Add support for SyncE recovered clock configuration Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 5/6] ice: add support for SyncE recovered clocks Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v3 net-next 6/6] docs: net: Add description of SyncE interfaces Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-10 11:44 ` Maciej Machnikowski
2021-11-11 12:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Petr Machata
2021-11-11 12:43 ` Petr Machata
2021-11-15 10:24 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-15 10:24 ` Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-16 11:07 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Petr Machata
2021-11-16 11:07 ` Petr Machata
2021-11-16 11:52 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Petr Machata
2021-11-16 11:52 ` Petr Machata
2021-11-16 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Machnikowski, Maciej
2021-11-16 14:26 ` Machnikowski, Maciej
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20211116154111.GF6326@breakpoint.cc \
--to=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.