netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 1/1] e1000e: Expose MDI-X status via ethtool change

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9929d2390906031431t44de3203rf35500024af541aa@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:31:32 -0700
From:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To:	Chaitanya Lala <clala@...erbed.com>
Cc:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 1/1] e1000e: Expose MDI-X status via ethtool 
	change

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Chaitanya Lala <clala@...erbed.com> wrote:
> Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Chaitanya Lala <clala@...erbed.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 16:15 -0700, Chaitanya Lala wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/ethtool.h b/include/linux/ethtool.h
>>>>> index 380b042..b553bdb 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/ethtool.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/ethtool.h
>>>>> @@ -30,7 +30,8 @@ struct ethtool_cmd {
>>>>>       __u32   maxtxpkt;       /* Tx pkts before generating tx int */
>>>>>       __u32   maxrxpkt;       /* Rx pkts before generating rx int */
>>>>>       __u16   speed_hi;
>>>>> -       __u16   reserved2;
>>>>> +       __u8    is_mdix;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since this is specific to Ethernet over twisted-pair cable, could you
>>>> please rename this to "eth_tp_mdix".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Will do for sure.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +       __u8    reserved2;
>>>>>       __u32   lp_advertising; /* Features the link partner advertises
>>>>> */
>>>>>       __u32   reserved[2];
>>>>>  };
>>>>> @@ -632,6 +633,11 @@ struct ethtool_ops {
>>>>>  #define AUTONEG_DISABLE                0x00
>>>>>  #define AUTONEG_ENABLE         0x01
>>>>>  +/* Mode MDI or MDI-X */
>>>>> +#define MDI_INVALID 0x00
>>>>> +#define MDI         0x01
>>>>> +#define MDI_X       0x02
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> Similarly, please add the prefix "ETH_TP_" to these.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>
>> Chaitanya, I have made the requested changes to the patch in my tree.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks. I am very new to procedure of submitting kernel patches. Just want
> to make sure if this means that I not need to send another patch to netdev ?
>
> Thanks,
> Chaitanya
> --

When there are changes requested on a patch, yes the patch needs to be
re-submitted to netdev.  Since I will be pushing this patch along with
other patches for Intel drivers to Dave once testing has been
completed, there is no need for you to re-submit this patch.  I have
already sucked in the changes that Ben has requested into the patch
that is in my tree.

-- 
Cheers,
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