From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [RFC, 1/2] ethtool: Implement private flags interface for ethtool application. Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 22:34:32 +0100 Message-ID: <1314999272.3419.19.camel@bwh-desktop> References: <1314996631-4773-1-git-send-email-carolyn.wyborny@intel.com> <20110902.165524.1076389492712310664.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: "Wyborny, Carolyn" , David Miller , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Miros=C5=82aw?= Return-path: Received: from mail.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:29650 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756024Ab1IBVef convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Sep 2011 17:34:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 23:22 +0200, Micha=C5=82 Miros=C5=82aw wrote: > W dniu 2 wrze=C5=9Bnia 2011 23:17 u=C5=BCytkownik Micha=C5=82 Miros=C5= =82aw > napisa=C5=82: > > 2011/9/2 Wyborny, Carolyn : > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: David Miller [mailto:davem@davemloft.net] > >>>Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 1:55 PM > >>>To: Wyborny, Carolyn > >>>Cc: bhutchings@solarflare.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org > >>>Subject: Re: [RFC, 1/2] ethtool: Implement private flags interface= for > >>>ethtool application. > >>> > >>>From: Carolyn Wyborny > >>>Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 13:50:30 -0700 > >>> > >>>> This patch completes the user space implementation of the privat= e > >>>> flags inteface in ethtool. Using -b/-B options. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Carolyn Wyborny > >>> > >>>The only use case you show here is something generic which other > >>>chips have, Energy Efficient Ethernet. > >>> > >>>Making an attribute private which is present widely amonst various > >>>networking chips makes no sense at all. > >>> > >>>It deserved a generic ethtool flag. > >> > >> Fair enough on this particular feature, but does that negate the i= mplementation suggestion altogether? I can send an updated feature imp= lementation for the use case using DMA Coalescing if that will help. > > I would rather see this as an extension to ETHTOOL_[GS]FEATURES. It= s > > semantics allow easy expanding to handle device-private flags witho= ut > > changing anything on userspace side. >=20 > BTW, After pending Intel drivers get converted to ndo_set_features an= d > netdev->features get extended to 64 bits, it would also be possible t= o > use some of the unused bits there for device/driver-private flags > almost "for free". I don't really like the idea of mixing common feature flags with driver-specific flags. It's likely to lead to confusion if you mix devices with different drivers in a bridge or a bond. Ben. --=20 Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.