[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110218142238.GA18099@rere.qmqm.pl>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:22:38 +0100
From: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, bhutchings@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] net: Unified offload configuration
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 02:56:11PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:59:16 +0100 (CET)
> > Here's a v6 of the ethtool unification patch series.
> >
> > What's in it?
> > 1..4:
> > cleanups for the core patches
> > 5:
> > the patch - implement unified ethtool setting ops
> > 6..7:
> > implement interoperation between old and new ethtool ops
> > 8:
> > include RX checksum in features and plug it into new framework
> > 9:
> > convert loopback device to new framework
> >
> > What is it good for?
> > - unifies driver behaviour wrt hardware offloads
> > - removes a lot of boilerplate code from drivers
> > - allows better fine-grained control over used offloads
> Applied to net-next-2.6, please send any bug fixes relative to this.
>
> Please get rid of that annoying message spit out by netif_features_change(),
> it's just spam. If we want notifications for stuff like this, use a
> non-unicast netlink message so those who want to hear it can do so.
You mean netdev_update_features() "Features changed" message? Is it ok
to just demote it to DEBUG level or you want to remove it altogether?
What about netdev_fix_features() messages?
Best Regards,
Michał Mirosław
--
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