From: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
Cc: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
Don Bollinger <don@thebollingers.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool v2 3/4] ethtool: Rename QSFP-DD identifiers to use CMIS 4.0
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 10:17:57 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f209cd19-b841-22c5-ad08-b41f36a270c8@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YLTxWcO1pNQkN3Yr@shredder>
On 5/31/2021 5:23 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 05:18:59PM +0300, Moshe Shemesh wrote:
>> From: Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@nvidia.com>
>>
>> QSFP-DD and DSFP EEPROM layout complies to CMIS 4.0 specification. As
>> DSFP support is added, there are currently two standards, which share
>> the same infrastructure. Rename QSFP_DD and qsfp_dd occurrences to use
>> CMIS4 or cmis4 respectively to make function names generic for any
>> module compliant to CMIS 4.0.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladyslav Tarasiuk <vladyslavt@nvidia.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> Makefile.am | 2 +-
>> qsfp-dd.c => cmis4.c | 210 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>> cmis4.h | 128 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> netlink/module-eeprom.c | 2 +-
>> qsfp.c | 2 +-
>> 5 files changed, 236 insertions(+), 108 deletions(-)
>> rename qsfp-dd.c => cmis4.c (56%)
>> create mode 100644 cmis4.h
> Is there a reason to call this "cmis4" instead of just "cmis"? Revision
> 5.0 was published earlier this month [1] and I assume more revisions
> will follow.
We called it cmis4 as we comply here with CMIS version 4.
However, I understand your point that other eeprom module specifications
only spec number is mentioned and probably we can do the same here.
Andrew, Michal, WDYT ?
> Other standards (e.g., SFF-8024) also have multiple revisions and the
> revision number is only mentioned in the "revision compliance" field.
>
> [1] http://www.qsfp-dd.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CMIS5p0.pdf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-03 7:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-24 14:18 [PATCH ethtool v2 0/4] Extend module EEPROM API Moshe Shemesh
2021-05-24 14:18 ` [PATCH ethtool v2 1/4] ethtool: Add netlink handler for getmodule (-m) Moshe Shemesh
2021-05-24 14:18 ` [PATCH ethtool v2 2/4] ethtool: Refactor human-readable module EEPROM output for new API Moshe Shemesh
2021-05-24 14:18 ` [PATCH ethtool v2 3/4] ethtool: Rename QSFP-DD identifiers to use CMIS 4.0 Moshe Shemesh
2021-05-31 14:23 ` Ido Schimmel
2021-06-03 7:17 ` Moshe Shemesh [this message]
2021-05-24 14:19 ` [PATCH ethtool v2 4/4] ethtool: Update manpages to reflect changes to getmodule (-m) command Moshe Shemesh
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=f209cd19-b841-22c5-ad08-b41f36a270c8@nvidia.com \
--to=moshe@nvidia.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=don@thebollingers.org \
--cc=idosch@idosch.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=mkubecek@suse.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vladyslavt@nvidia.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 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.