netdev - Re: Ethtool question

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: <20171011204406.GC30940@tuxdriver.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Oct 2017 16:44:07 -0400
From:   "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
To:     Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Ethtool question

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 09:51:56AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> I noticed today that setting some ethtool settings to the same value
> returns an error code.  I would think this should silently return
> success instead?  Makes it easier to call it from scripts this way:
> 
> [root@...313-6477 lanforge]# ethtool -L eth3 combined 1
> combined unmodified, ignoring
> no channel parameters changed, aborting
> current values: tx 0 rx 0 other 1 combined 1
> [root@...313-6477 lanforge]# echo $?
> 1

I just had this discussion a couple of months ago with someone. My
initial feeling was like you, a no-op is not a failure. But someone
convinced me otherwise...I will now endeavour to remember who that
was and how they convinced me...

Anyone else have input here?

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@...driver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.