netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v1 4/9] net: ethtool: Add attributes for cable test reports

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]

Date:   Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:16:05 +0200
From:   Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To:     andrew@...n.ch
Cc:     cphealy@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        hkallweit1@...il.com, mkubecek@...e.cz, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 4/9] net: ethtool: Add attributes for cable test reports

Hi,

> > > > +enum {
> > > > +	ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_PAIR_0,
> > > > +	ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_PAIR_1,
> > > > +	ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_PAIR_2,
> > > > +	ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_PAIR_3,
> > > > +};
> > > 
> > > Do we really need this enum, couldn't we simply use a number (possibly
> > > with a sanity check of maximum value)?
> > 
> > They are not strictly required. But it helps with consistence. Are the
> > pairs numbered 0, 1, 2, 3, or 1, 2, 3, 4?
> 
> OK, I'm not strictly opposed to it, it just felt a bit weird.

Speaking of the pairs. What is PAIR_0 and what is PAIR_3? Maybe
it is specified somewhere in a standard, but IMHO an example for
a normal TP cable would help to prevent wild growth amongst the
PHY drivers and would help to provide consistent reporting towards
the user space.

-michael