Re: [PATCH net-next v2 05/12] net: ethtool: optionally skip rtnl_lock on Netlink path for SET ops

[Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>]

On 6/4/2026 5:29 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/ethtool.h b/include/linux/ethtool.h
> index 1da49161d36f..74c8109b0cf3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ethtool.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ethtool.h
> @@ -935,7 +935,13 @@ struct kernel_ethtool_ts_info {
>   * these bits separate, per GET and SET. GET is much easier to "unlock".
>   */
>  #define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_LINKSETTINGS	BIT(0)
> -#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_GPAUSEPARAM	BIT(1)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_SPFLAGS		BIT(1)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_SRINGPARAM	BIT(2)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_SCHANNELS		BIT(3)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_SCOALESCE		BIT(4)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_GPAUSEPARAM	BIT(5)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_SPAUSEPARAM	BIT(6)
> +#define ETHTOOL_OP_NEEDS_RTNL_RSS		BIT(7)

Whats the reasoning for changing order here? Is this sorted somehow?
Would it make more sense to use an enum to define the bits instead so
that patches don't have to do a -/+ of the same NAME?

IMO not really worth re-rolling the series over, it just made it a bit
more work to read the patch as I was reviewing.