[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47C2FB1F.5090009@garzik.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:30:07 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] ethtool netlink interface
Thomas Graf wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Before I continue to finish this work I'd like to get a few comments
> on my implementation attempt.
>
> The following patch implements the ETHTOOL_SSET and ETHTOOL_GSET
> command via netlink. The individual commands are implemented as
> separate functions and hooked into a table holding a validate,
> set and fill function for each command. Additionaly an entry must
> be made in the attribute policy to validate attributes when received.
>
> Each ethtool command bundle is stored as a nested attribute in
> the regular link netlink message, therefore, unlike the ioctl
> interface, multiple ethtool commands can be issued in the same
> message allowing for links to be fully configured with a single
> message.
>
> There is one big disadvantage: Due to the nature of ioctl it is
> basically not possible to share any code between the ioctl and
> neltink implementation therefore it implies duplicating code
> unless we want to do the same hack as fib fronted by constructing
> netlink messages inside the kernel.
No objections, and it certainly makes sense that you would need a
separate "thunking" layer to unwrap ethtool-nl msgs rather than handling
an ioctl.
However, I would think it inconsistent to only do SSET/GSET. If others
are OK with this patch, are you open to implementing the full set of
ethtool operations?
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists