[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190328081010.GJ14297@nanopsycho>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 09:10:10 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 05/22] ethtool: introduce ethtool netlink
interface
Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 03:05:14AM CET, f.fainelli@...il.com wrote:
>
>
>On 3/27/2019 2:50 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>
>> Why don't you have ETHTOOL_MSG_SET_FOO for set? I think that for
>> kerne->userspace the ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO if fine. I would change the
>> ordering of words thought, but it is cosmetics:
>> ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO /* kernel->userspace messages - replies, notifications */
>> ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_GET
>> ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_SET
>> ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_ACT
>>
>> What do you think?
>
>We could even name the notification explicitly with: ETHTOOL_MSG_NOTIF
>or ETHTOOL_MSG_NTF just so we spell out exactly what those messages are.
Sound good. Something like:
ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_GET
ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_GET_RPLY /* kernel->userspace replies to get */
ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_SET
ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_ACT
ETHTOOL_MSG_FOO_NTF /* kernel->userspace async messages - notifications */
Powered by blists - more mailing lists