Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v4 4/5] ice: Add tx_scheduling_layers devlink param

[Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>]

Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:41:52PM CET, andrew@lunn.ch wrote:
>> What if it would not be unique, should they then proceed to add generic
>> (other word would be "common") param, and make the other driver/s use
>> it? Without deprecating the old method ofc.
>
>If it is useful, somebody else will copy it and it will become
>common. If nobody copies it, its probably not useful :-)
>
>A lot of what we do in networking comes from standard. Its the
>standards which gives us interoperability. Also, there is the saying,
>form follows function. There are only so many ways you can implement
>the same thing.
>
>Is anybody truly building unique hardware, whos form somehow does not
>follow function and is yet still standards compliant? More likely,
>they are just the first, and others will copy or re-invent it sooner
>or later.

Wait, standard in protocol sense is completely parallel to the hw/fw
implementations. They may be (and in reality they are) a lots of
tunables to tweak specific hw/fw internals. So modern nics are very
unique. Still providing the same inputs and outputs, protocol-wise.


>
>So for me, unique is a pretty high bar to reach.
>
>	Andrew
>