[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1217518591.3657.27.camel@calx>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:36:31 -0500
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: dwmw2@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com,
shemminger@...tta.com, jeff@...zik.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 12/12] Configure out ethtool support
On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 03:47 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> I especially appreciate that you still haven't accepted the plain fact
> that CONFIG_ETHTOOL needs to be selected by CONFIG_INET.
So far the following features have been mentioned as being critically
dependent on ethtool:
- bridging
- bonding
- LRO
- netfilter (really?)
- IPv6 (really?)
And yet every single one of these is currently a config option, so your
above statement is still looking awfully dubious. At this point I'd
suggest that you've painted yourself into a corner where all these
options must also actually be mandatory, but I'm afraid you might
secretly want to do that anyway.
> I definitely see the next consequence of the CONFIG_ETHTOOL stuff, and
> that's a set of ifdef'ola in all the drivers to config out the
> per-driver ethtool support code.
If someone shows up with such a patch for a Xylinx or ARM SOC device,
you probably should take it. If the patch is instead for a 10Gb PCIe
device, I suggest you don't. (At least not until that sort of thing
becomes standard embedded kit.)
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
--
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