[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1304533522.2926.58.camel@bwh-desktop>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 19:25:22 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Ajit.Khaparde@...lex.Com
Cc: anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
--no-chain-reply-to@...qlogic.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: RE: [ethtool PATCH] FW dump support
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 11:15 -0700, Ajit.Khaparde@...lex.Com wrote:
> ________________________________________
> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Ben Hutchings [bhutchings@...arflare.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:40 PM
> To: anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; --no-chain-reply-to@...qlogic.com; davem@...emloft.net
> Subject: Re: [ethtool PATCH] FW dump support
>
> > On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 16:29 -0700, anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com wrote:
> >> From: Anirban Chakraborty <anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com>
> >>
> >> Added support to take FW dump via ethtool.
> > [...]
> >> --- a/ethtool.c
> >> +++ b/ethtool.c
> > [...]
> >> @@ -263,6 +270,12 @@ static struct option {
> >> "Get Rx ntuple filters and actions\n" },
> >> { "-P", "--show-permaddr", MODE_PERMADDR,
> >> "Show permanent hardware address" },
> >> + { "-W", "--get-dump", MODE_GET_DUMP,
> >> + "Get dump level\n" },
> >> + { "-Wd", "--get-dump-data", MODE_GET_DUMP_DATA,
> >> + "Get dump data", "FILENAME " "Name of the dump file\n" },
> >
> > The short options should only include one letter. Also the general
> > pattern is that 'get' options use lower-case letters and 'set' options
> > use upper-case letters. No, I'm not sure how best to handle a set of 3
> > options. Maybe you can combine --get-dump and --get-dump-data, making
> > the filename optional?
>
> ethtool already has "-f" option to flash/write the FW image.
> Can you use "-F" to get the FW dump data out?
> And then may be, these options can be extended to get the get/set dump levels?
Although '-F' would be nicely mnemonic, firmware update and dump are
different enough that I don't think they make sense as a pair. If a
driver implements both then there is the risk of a typo causing the
firmware image file to be overwritten with a firmware dump. I also
don't think it's possible to extend the '-f' option without breaking
compatibility with scripts that already use it.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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