From: Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] e1000e: ethtool: add get_channels support
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 00:59:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6F0C5872-0388-47AF-8CD9-1D116EA13224@nutanix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260504164901.7b3a737b@kernel.org>
> On May 4, 2026, at 7:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 4 May 2026 08:48:23 -0700 Jon Kohler wrote:
>> e1000e hardware supports a single RX/TX queue pair, add basic support
>> for ethtool -l (i.e. get_channels), so that callers indeed see a single
>> queue.
>
> Why? Isn't EOPNOTSUP from ethtool -l implicitly saying that there's
> only one queue?
Perhaps, but I’m not sure that is a guarantee. A good relevant example
is when I added get_channels support to enic, which supports all sorts
of channels, so I don’t think EOPNOTSUP can be 100% consider reliable
in that case. Meaning, if it just so happens that the original author(s)
didn't put in get_channels, that doesn’t necessarily mean there is only
one queue.
And in this case, there is an "other" queue as as well too, as far as
I can tell, so the output is at least semi-interesting.
Jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-05 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-04 15:48 [PATCH net-next] e1000e: ethtool: add get_channels support Jon Kohler
2026-05-04 17:41 ` Joe Damato
2026-05-04 23:49 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-05 0:59 ` Jon Kohler [this message]
2026-05-05 1:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-05 1:12 ` Jon Kohler
2026-05-05 1:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6F0C5872-0388-47AF-8CD9-1D116EA13224@nutanix.com \
--to=jon@nutanix.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox