From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: the future of ethtool Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 21:14:02 +0000 Message-ID: <1289855642.2586.38.camel@bwh-desktop> References: <4CE18CEA.5080502@garzik.org> <1289852326.2586.32.camel@bwh-desktop> <20101115124428.7b857ccb@nehalam> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff Garzik , NetDev , David Miller To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:59396 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933849Ab0KOVOF (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 16:14:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20101115124428.7b857ccb@nehalam> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 12:44 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: [...] > My views are simple: > > Ethtool needs to be an extension of existing netlink API for interfaces. > - handles multiple values per transaction > - extensible [...] Are you suggesting to send and receive the existing ethtool command and result structures (with some wrapping) through netlink? Or some larger change to the API? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.