Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCHv3 net-next iwl-next] net: intel: use ethtool string helpers

[Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>]

On 11/5/24 06:47, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> On 10/31/24 22:14, Rosen Penev wrote:
>> The latter is the preferred way to copy ethtool strings.
>>
>> Avoids manually incrementing the pointer. Cleans up the code quite well.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   v3: change custom get_strings to u8** to make sure pointer increments
>>   get propagated.
> 
> I'm sorry for misleading you here, or perhaps not being clear enough.
> 
> Let me restate: I'm fine with double pointer, but single pointer is also
> fine, no need to change if not used.
> 
> And my biggest corncern is that you change big chunks of the code for no
> reason, please either drop those changes/those drivers, or adjust to
> have only minimal changes.
> 
> please fine this complain embedded in the code inline for ice, igb, igc,
> and ixgbe

I would be happy to accept your changes trimmed to the drivers I didn't
complained about, I find that part a valuable contribution from you

PS. No need to CC XDP/BFP list/people for such changes
[removed those]

> 
>>   v2: add iwl-next tag. use inline int in for loops.
>>   .../net/ethernet/intel/e1000/e1000_ethtool.c  | 10 ++---
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ethtool.c   | 14 +++---
>>   .../net/ethernet/intel/fm10k/fm10k_ethtool.c  | 10 ++---
>>   .../net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ethtool.c    |  6 +--
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c  | 43 +++++++++++--------
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c  | 35 ++++++++-------
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igbvf/ethtool.c    | 10 ++---
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c  | 36 ++++++++--------
>>   .../net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethtool.c  | 32 +++++++-------
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/ethtool.c  | 36 ++++++----------
>>   10 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 114 deletions(-)