From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make possible speeds known to ethtool Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:12:01 -0500 Message-ID: <49656F01.3090603@pobox.com> References: <200901080203.SAA19103@tardy.cup.hp.com> <1231384446.2677.32.camel@hashbaz.i.decadent.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rick Jones , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Hutchings Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:40173 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751778AbZAHDMJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 22:12:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1231384446.2677.32.camel@hashbaz.i.decadent.org.uk> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 18:03 -0800, Rick Jones wrote: >> Certain Broadcom 10Gb Ethernet solutions (e.g. the 57711E) can have a >> 10Gb port split into multiple virtual NICs each with an instance of >> the bnx2x driver. These virtual NICs can be configured for any speed >> which is an integer multiple of 100 Mb/s from 100 to 10,000 Mbit/s >> inclusive. Since this is "normal" for such systems an "Unknown!" is >> not indicated. > [...] > > The vetting of speeds is kind of silly. Given that speed is established > as being a number of Mbit/s (hence the need for speed_hi), why not > remove the warning and the checks for known values and report it as > such? I'm ok with that route. Historically it made sense, but AFAICS the driver _must_ verify the speed anyway, so removing the limitation in the userspace tool seems reasonable. The next release of ethtool is coming in about 4 weeks, and we can definitely get something like this in there. Jeff