[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160229.175040.1966545191136367460.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:50:40 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: ben@...adent.org.uk
Cc: sixiao@...rosoft.com, kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com,
devel@...uxdriverproject.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] hv_netvsc: add ethtool support for set and
get of settings
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:34:38 +0000
> On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 17:09 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Simon Xiao <sixiao@...rosoft.com>
>> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:24:08 -0800
>>
>> > This patch allows the user to set and retrieve speed and duplex of the
>> > hv_netvsc device via ethtool.
>> >
>> > Example:
>> > $ ethtool eth0
>> > Settings for eth0:
>> > ...
>> > Speed: Unknown!
>> > Duplex: Unknown! (255)
>> > ...
>> > $ ethtool -s eth0 speed 1000 duplex full
>> > $ ethtool eth0
>> > Settings for eth0:
>> > ...
>> > Speed: 1000Mb/s
>> > Duplex: Full
>> > ...
>> >
>> > This is based on patches by Roopa Prabhu and Nikolay Aleksandrov.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Simon Xiao <sixiao@...rosoft.com>
>>
>> Applied, thanks.
>
> I missed this due to flu, but now I look at it - I don't see the point.
> Link speed isn't meaingful for a memory-based transport, so "unknown"
> is correct. The link is effectively full duplex though.
>
> If the issue is that ethtool is a bit shouty about unknowns, let's
> consider changing that in ethtool, not teaching drivers to lie.
The issue is that certain bonding modes do not work properly without
a speed being reported by a device.
We're doing this for other "virtual" devices already thanks to changes
that went in last week, so there is precedence.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists