From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool] ethtool: support combinations of FEC modes
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 16:38:27 +0100
Message-ID: <613d954c-d88c-fa20-f436-75625f11a2ae@solarflare.com>
References: <518b8b8b-0151-1053-3798-6009044ed53a@solarflare.com>
 <20180919144117.GF3876@unicorn.suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ganesh Goudar <ganeshgr@chelsio.com>,
        "Jakub Kicinski" <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
        Dustin Byford <dustin@cumulusnetworks.com>,
        Dirk van der Merwe <dirk.vandermerwe@netronome.com>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com ([67.231.154.164]:49558 "EHLO
        dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732255AbeISVRD (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 19 Sep 2018 17:17:03 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20180919144117.GF3876@unicorn.suse.cz>
Content-Language: en-GB
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 19/09/18 15:41, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> I'm sorry I didn't notice this before the patch was accepted but as it's
> not in a release yet, maybe it's still not too late.
>
> Could I suggest to make the syntax consistent with other options?
I didn't realise ethtool had any patterns to be consistent with ;)
> I mean rather than a comma separated list to use either
>
>   ethtool --set-fec <dev> encoding enc1 enc2 ...
but yes this looks fine to me, as long as we're reasonably confident that
 we won't want to add new parameters (that might require determining
 whether enc2 is an encoding or a parameter name) in the future, because
 while the parsing wouldn't be impossible it might get ugly.

I'll rustle up an RFC patch.

-Ed