From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] qlcnic: fail when try to setup unsupported
 features
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:00:25 +0200
Message-ID: <20100629170025.7a130e28@dhcp-lab-109.englab.brq.redhat.com>
References: <20100628113134.0c5208b0@dhcp-lab-109.englab.brq.redhat.com>
	<99737F4847ED0A48AECC9F4A1974A4B80F82CB7D46@MNEXMB2.qlogic.org>
	<20100628145819.74d22d5f@dhcp-lab-109.englab.brq.redhat.com>
	<99737F4847ED0A48AECC9F4A1974A4B80F82CB7D4E@MNEXMB2.qlogic.org>
	<20100628161412.7d9d0e4f@dhcp-lab-109.englab.brq.redhat.com>
	<1277734724.2089.10.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com>
	<1277822484.2112.19.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Amit Salecha <amit.salecha@qlogic.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>,
	Anirban Chakraborty <anirban.chakraborty@qlogic.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54692 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1756410Ab0F2PAf (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:00:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1277822484.2112.19.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:41:24 +0100
Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 15:18 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 16:14 +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > [...]
> > > My plan is something like that:
> > > 
> > > static const struct ethtool_ops my_ethtool_ops = {
> > >         .get_flags              = ethtool_op_get_flags,
> > >         .set_flags              = ethtool_op_set_flags,
> > > 	.supported_flags	= ETH_FLAG_LRO
> > > }
> > > 
> > > Plus op->supported_flags check in ethtool_op_set_flags. That will allow
> > > to define flags per driver. There is also possible to add supported_flags
> > > to netdev, but I would like to avoid that - in such case drivers can use
> > > custom .set_flags function.
> > 
> > Sounds good to me.
> 
> On second thoughts, this is not going work - supported_flags may need to
> be different for different chips handled by the same driver.  

I thought about driver custom ethtool_ops::set_flags in that case.

> In fact,
> this is already the case in sfc.  So I think you should do what I
> suggested previously - add a supported_flags parameter to
> ethtool_op_set_flags.

What about call from net/core/ethtool.c ? 

Stanislaw