Should "N/A" dust bunnies be swept from fw_version?

Should "N/A" dust bunnies be swept from fw_version?

[Rick Jones]

In the discussion on "enable virtio_net to return bus_info in ethtool -i 
consistent with emulated NICs" Ben Hutchings had the following feedback 
on what might go into bus_info:

> Please use the existing 'not implemented' value, which is the empty
> string.   If you think ethtool should print some helpful message instead
> of an empty string, please submit a patch for ethtool.

When I was sweeping in the .get_drvinfo routines, I noticed many drivers 
would return "N/A" for fw_version - presumably they were drivers for 
cards without firmware.  Should those be removed to have the fw_version 
be the empty string, or should those sleeping dust bunnies be allowed to 
lie?

rick jones

Re: Should "N/A" dust bunnies be swept from fw_version?

[Ben Hutchings]

On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:27 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> In the discussion on "enable virtio_net to return bus_info in ethtool -i 
> consistent with emulated NICs" Ben Hutchings had the following feedback 
> on what might go into bus_info:
> 
> > Please use the existing 'not implemented' value, which is the empty
> > string.   If you think ethtool should print some helpful message instead
> > of an empty string, please submit a patch for ethtool.
> 
> When I was sweeping in the .get_drvinfo routines, I noticed many drivers 
> would return "N/A" for fw_version - presumably they were drivers for 
> cards without firmware.  Should those be removed to have the fw_version 
> be the empty string, or should those sleeping dust bunnies be allowed to 
> lie?

I much prefer the empty string; the ethtool utility can turn that into a
user-friendly placeholder if it's considered confusing.

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.

Re: Should "N/A" dust bunnies be swept from fw_version?

[Rick Jones]

On 11/17/2011 04:19 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:27 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
>> In the discussion on "enable virtio_net to return bus_info in ethtool -i
>> consistent with emulated NICs" Ben Hutchings had the following feedback
>> on what might go into bus_info:
>>
>>> Please use the existing 'not implemented' value, which is the empty
>>> string.   If you think ethtool should print some helpful message instead
>>> of an empty string, please submit a patch for ethtool.
>>
>> When I was sweeping in the .get_drvinfo routines, I noticed many drivers
>> would return "N/A" for fw_version - presumably they were drivers for
>> cards without firmware.  Should those be removed to have the fw_version
>> be the empty string, or should those sleeping dust bunnies be allowed to
>> lie?
>
> I much prefer the empty string; the ethtool utility can turn that into a
> user-friendly placeholder if it's considered confusing.

Any other opinions out there?  Anyone? Anyone?-)

rick jones

Re: Should "N/A" dust bunnies be swept from fw_version?

[David Miller]

From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:09:48 -0800

> On 11/17/2011 04:19 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:27 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
>>> In the discussion on "enable virtio_net to return bus_info in ethtool
>>> -i
>>> consistent with emulated NICs" Ben Hutchings had the following
>>> feedback
>>> on what might go into bus_info:
>>>
>>>> Please use the existing 'not implemented' value, which is the empty
>>>> string.  If you think ethtool should print some helpful message
>>>> instead
>>>> of an empty string, please submit a patch for ethtool.
>>>
>>> When I was sweeping in the .get_drvinfo routines, I noticed many
>>> drivers
>>> would return "N/A" for fw_version - presumably they were drivers for
>>> cards without firmware.  Should those be removed to have the
>>> fw_version
>>> be the empty string, or should those sleeping dust bunnies be allowed
>>> to
>>> lie?
>>
>> I much prefer the empty string; the ethtool utility can turn that into
>> a
>> user-friendly placeholder if it's considered confusing.
> 
> Any other opinions out there?  Anyone? Anyone?-)

I agree with Ben, just provide the empty string.

Re: Should "N/A" dust bunnies be swept from fw_version?

[Rick Jones]

On 11/18/2011 11:10 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Rick Jones<rick.jones2@hp.com>
> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:09:48 -0800
>
>> On 11/17/2011 04:19 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:27 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
>>>> In the discussion on "enable virtio_net to return bus_info in ethtool
>>>> -i
>>>> consistent with emulated NICs" Ben Hutchings had the following
>>>> feedback
>>>> on what might go into bus_info:
>>>>
>>>>> Please use the existing 'not implemented' value, which is the empty
>>>>> string.  If you think ethtool should print some helpful message
>>>>> instead
>>>>> of an empty string, please submit a patch for ethtool.
>>>>
>>>> When I was sweeping in the .get_drvinfo routines, I noticed many
>>>> drivers
>>>> would return "N/A" for fw_version - presumably they were drivers for
>>>> cards without firmware.  Should those be removed to have the
>>>> fw_version
>>>> be the empty string, or should those sleeping dust bunnies be allowed
>>>> to
>>>> lie?
>>>
>>> I much prefer the empty string; the ethtool utility can turn that into
>>> a
>>> user-friendly placeholder if it's considered confusing.
>>
>> Any other opinions out there?  Anyone? Anyone?-)
>
> I agree with Ben, just provide the empty string.

OK, when I have time to pick-up my broom, I'll do some additional sweeping.

rick