From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [RFC, 1/2] ethtool: Implement private flags interface for ethtool application. Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 22:27:11 +0100 Message-ID: <1314998831.3419.12.camel@bwh-desktop> References: <1314996631-4773-1-git-send-email-carolyn.wyborny@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Carolyn Wyborny Return-path: Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:28921 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755986Ab1IBV1O (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Sep 2011 17:27:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1314996631-4773-1-git-send-email-carolyn.wyborny@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 13:50 -0700, Carolyn Wyborny wrote: > This patch completes the user space implementation of the private > flags inteface in ethtool. Using -b/-B options. [...] Private flags are supposed to be named (string set ETH_SS_PRIV_FLAGS). ethtool should only support getting and setting flags by name, not number. That way people can actually remember what the flags do and their scripts won't break when the driver changes flag numbers. 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.