From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Jiri Benc <jbenc@suse.cz>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
Simon Barber <simon@devicescape.com>,
Jouni Malinen <jkm@devicescape.com>,
Hong Liu <hong.liu@intel.com>,
David Kimdon <david.kimdon@devicescape.com>,
Michael Wu <flamingice@sourmilk.net>,
Michael Buesch <mbuesch@freenet.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] d80211 ethtool
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:17:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1164215833.5934.8.camel@johannes.berg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200611221759.01579.IvDoorn@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 920 bytes --]
On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 17:59 +0100, Ivo van Doorn wrote:
> This patch adds the ethtool_ops reference into the
> ieee80211_ops structure, and makes sure that it will
> be set on all new interfaces that will be created.
I disagree. Most ethtool ops are really tied to actual ethernet (TSO or
UFO for wireless?) and make no sense to have on wireless devices. From
what I can tell, you're using
(a) get_link
(b) eeprom dump
(c) message level
(d) driver info
(e) register dump
(f) get perm addr
(f) will be added to the wiphy stuff in cfg80211/nl80211. (a) has a bit
of a semantic problem, when, for example, does an access point or
monitor device have carrier/lower level ok?
(b) and (e) can be in debugfs, (c) can be a sysfs-modifiable module
parameter.
That leaves just (d) which isn't all that useful anyway.
I just don't see why the ethtool ops should be there at all.
johannes
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-22 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200611221608.09234.IvDoorn@gmail.com>
2006-11-22 16:59 ` [PATCH] d80211 ethtool Ivo van Doorn
2006-11-22 17:17 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
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=1164215833.5934.8.camel@johannes.berg \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=david.kimdon@devicescape.com \
--cc=flamingice@sourmilk.net \
--cc=hong.liu@intel.com \
--cc=ivdoorn@gmail.com \
--cc=jbenc@suse.cz \
--cc=jkm@devicescape.com \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=mbuesch@freenet.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simon@devicescape.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox