[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081121121625.6cdf22b6@extreme>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:16:25 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To: "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc: "Dan Williams" <dcbw@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
"Bruce Allan" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [NET-NEXT PATCH 08/14] e1000e: link up/down messages must
follow a specific format
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:23:42 -0800
"Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 11:01 -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> >> From: Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>
> >>
> >> The system log messages created on a link status change need to follow a
> >> specific format to work with tools some customers use.
> >
> > Um, shouldn't those tools be listening to netlink for carrier events, or
> > are these tools run on a separate machine using on some later date using
> > the logs from the machine with the e1000e?
> >
> > Dan
> >
>
> From my understanding these tools are looking at the logs and that is
> why we need to have a consistent log message.
>
These tools are tied to a specific driver (yours), because not all drivers
generate a message or the same format message. This may be okay for Intel
but is really stupid design...
It would be good if link state transitions generated uevents (online/offline).
Then udev, hal and others could use that without netlink.
--
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