From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eli Cohen Subject: Re: invalid requirement from ethtool? Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:55:56 +0300 Message-ID: <20110728145556.GD6750@mtldesk30> References: <20110726124222.GA4842@mtldesk30> <20110727.224309.779719590419361909.davem@davemloft.net> <20110728072326.GC6750@mtldesk30> <20110728.003758.292509567308751079.davem@davemloft.net> <1311848553.2619.1.camel@deadeye> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Hutchings Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:55011 "EHLO mail-ww0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751676Ab1G1O4C (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:56:02 -0400 Received: by wwg11 with SMTP id 11so4080900wwg.1 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 07:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1311848553.2619.1.camel@deadeye> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:22:33PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > The ethtool core doesn't check the values in struct ethtool_coalesce, so > the rules are really driver-specific. > Exactly. That's why I think those comments are not in place.