From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: bruce.w.allan@intel.com
Cc: jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/8] e1000e: cleanup ethtool loopback setup code
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:06:15 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100630.160615.179276491.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8DD2590731AB5D4C9DBF71A877482A9001591F6130@orsmsx509.amr.corp.intel.com>
From: "Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:41:19 -0700
> I've been looking into your request number 2 above (as a reminder,
> it had to do with a patch I submitted that added a module parameter
> to e1000e in order to enable/disable Energy Efficient Ethernet for a
> particular type of adapter).
>
> For this new ethtool feature bit/flag for EEE, would you prefer it be set via:
> 1) the generic parameter setting option (e.g. -s ethX [eee on|off]),
> 2) yet another new show/change option pair, or
> 3) a new option that can set this new feature and be expandable to future features that are likewise not related to existing ethtool options (e.g. -F [eee on|off] [whizbang on|off])?
>
> For #2 or #3, it makes sense to use ethtool_op_[g|s]et_flags with
> new ETH_FLAG_<feature> and NETIF_F_<feature> defines, but #1 can be
> implemented that way or by using remaining reserved elements of
> struct ethtool_cmd - if your preference is for #1, would you prefer
> it be implemented with the former or latter?
I only have strong feelings about the kernel side, and an ETH_FLAG_* seems
best for this since other devices will have this feature too.
I don't think overloading parts of ethtool_cmd is wise.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-30 23:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-16 23:25 [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/8] e1000e: cleanup ethtool loopback setup code Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:26 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 2/8] e1000e: cleanup e1000_sw_lcd_config_ich8lan() Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:26 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 3/8] e1000e: separate out PHY statistics register updates Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:27 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 4/8] e1000e: fix check for manageability on ICHx/PCH Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:27 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 5/8] e1000e: initial support for 82579 LOMs Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:27 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 6/8] e1000e: enable support for EEE on 82579 Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:52 ` Ben Hutchings
2010-06-16 23:28 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 7/8] e1000e: update copyright information Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-16 23:28 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 8/8] e1000e: update driver version number Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-19 5:15 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/8] e1000e: cleanup ethtool loopback setup code David Miller
2010-06-20 7:32 ` Jeff Kirsher
2010-06-20 21:48 ` David Miller
2010-06-30 22:41 ` Allan, Bruce W
2010-06-30 23:06 ` David Miller [this message]
2010-07-01 15:55 ` Ben Hutchings
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=20100630.160615.179276491.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.