[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080731.035121.177567346.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: dwmw2@...radead.org
Cc: thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org, michael@...e-electrons.com,
mpm@...enic.com, jgarzik@...ox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] Configure out ethtool support
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:42:47 +0100
> It's alleged that these functions are called from 'core' network code in
> some places, although I can't actually see any evidence of that anywhere
> in Linus' tree except for vlans and bridging.
>
> If that's actually the case, perhaps it makes sense to add a
> WARN_ON_ONCE() to these empty functions, so that a developer who
> disables CONFIG_ETHTOOL when they shouldn't will see a nasty warning
> about it rather than a silent failure?
>
> Btw, I see you've made bridging 'select ETHTOOL'; did you do the same
> for vlan support?
CONFIG_INET needs it too.
dev_disable_lro() calls the ethtool ops directly.
But it still needs to be conditional, because as I said what I see
happening next is this CONFIG_ETHTOOL thing getting jammed into each
and every network driver. (in fact, ethtool support code in a single
driver probably drarfs the 6K savings this initial patch is giving
us).
And at which point you'll have a broken system for drivers that
enable LRO and the user enables forwarding.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists