From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gal Pressman Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 3/3] net/mlx5e: Expose link down reason to ethtool Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:33:39 +0300 Message-ID: <311af079-cf95-b487-f59a-9566e17296bf@gmail.com> References: <1498050286-17141-1-git-send-email-galp@mellanox.com> <1498050286-17141-4-git-send-email-galp@mellanox.com> <20170621213353.318e5d37@cakuba.netronome.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , "John W. Linville" , Saeed Mahameed , Vidya Sagar Ravipati , Jiri Pirko , David Decotigny , kernel-team@fb.com To: Jakub Kicinski , Gal Pressman Return-path: Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com ([209.85.128.194]:34795 "EHLO mail-wr0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751116AbdFVIdn (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2017 04:33:43 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f194.google.com with SMTP id k67so2790850wrc.1 for ; Thu, 22 Jun 2017 01:33:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170621213353.318e5d37@cakuba.netronome.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Is my reading correct that in case the reason is not in the > pddr2ethtool_table opaque binary data will be passed from the firmware > to user space? Is there any particular reason to allow for this? If > it's just for the rare scenario where a new error code needs to be > added perhaps it would be enough to dump the FW-provided message to the > logs? No binary data is passed in this patch, the monitor_opcode is simply a vendor specific 16 bit id that is used when the reason is not generic enough to have it's own enum.