Re: inconsistency of ethtool feature names for get vs. set

[Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>]

On Thu, 2014-01-02 at 11:47 +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> 
> I noticed some inconsistency of feature names with the ethtool 
> getting/setting of features mechanics -- the name of the feature you 
> need to set (through -K) isn't what displayed by the get (-k) directive, 
> here's an example:

All the feature names used to be in ethtool and they were not consistent
between -k/-K nor with the names that are now generated by the kernel.

> $ ethtool -k eth1  | grep generic-receive-offload
> generic-receive-offload: on
> 
> $ ethtool -K eth1  generic-receive-offload off
> ethtool: bad command line argument(s)
> For more information run ethtool -h
> 
> --> looking in the sources and realizing I need to use "rx-gro"

Or 'gro'.  All the old feature names that can be used with the -K option
are listed in the manual page.  All the new feature names are consistent
between -k/-K.

> $ ethtool -K eth1  rx-gro on
> 
> $ethtool -k eth1  | grep generic-receive-offload
> generic-receive-offload: on
> 
> same problem for rx checksum which is displayed as "rx-checksumming" by 
> the get (-k)
> but need to be "rx-checksum" for the set (-K) directive.
> 
> Basically, this can be resolved by fairly simple patch, but I wasn't 
> sure if you want it in user space, in the kernel or both...

How do you intend to resolve this, given the compatibility requirement
that the old names must still be reported by -k and accepted by -K?

Ben.

-- 
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.