Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 1/1] e1000e: Expose MDI-X status via ethtool change

Chaitanya Lala
2009-06-03T21:41:07Z

Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Chaitanya Lala <clala@riverbed.com> wrote:
>
>> Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Chaitanya Lala <clala@riverbed.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 16:15 -0700, Chaitanya Lala wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/ethtool.h b/include/linux/ethtool.h
>>>>>> index 380b042..b553bdb 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/ethtool.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/ethtool.h
>>>>>> @@ -30,7 +30,8 @@ struct ethtool_cmd {
>>>>>> __u32 maxtxpkt; /* Tx pkts before generating tx int */
>>>>>> __u32 maxrxpkt; /* Rx pkts before generating rx int */
>>>>>> __u16 speed_hi;
>>>>>> - __u16 reserved2;
>>>>>> + __u8 is_mdix;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Since this is specific to Ethernet over﻿ twisted-pair cable, could you
>>>>> please rename this to "eth_tp_mdix".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Will do for sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> + __u8 reserved2;
>>>>>> __u32 lp_advertising; /* Features the link partner advertises
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> __u32 reserved[2];
>>>>>> };
>>>>>> @@ -632,6 +633,11 @@ struct ethtool_ops {
>>>>>> #define AUTONEG_DISABLE 0x00
>>>>>> #define AUTONEG_ENABLE 0x01
>>>>>> +/* Mode MDI or MDI-X */
>>>>>> +#define MDI_INVALID 0x00
>>>>>> +#define MDI 0x01
>>>>>> +#define MDI_X 0x02
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>> Similarly, please add the prefix "ETH_TP_" to these.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Chaitanya, I have made the requested changes to the patch in my tree.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks. I am very new to procedure of submitting kernel patches. Just want
>> to make sure if this means that I not need to send another patch to netdev ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chaitanya
>> --
>>
>
> When there are changes requested on a patch, yes the patch needs to be
> re-submitted to netdev. Since I will be pushing this patch along with
> other patches for Intel drivers to Dave once testing has been
> completed, there is no need for you to re-submit this patch. I have
> already sucked in the changes that Ben has requested into the patch
> that is in my tree.
>
>
Thanks for the clarification.

Chaitanya