[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKOOJTzSSqGFzyL0jndK_y_S64C_imxORhACqp6RePDvtno6kA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:39:24 -0800
From: Edwin Peer <edwin.peer@...adcom.com>
To: Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, f.fainelli@...il.com,
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, mlxsw <mlxsw@...dia.com>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/7] ethtool: Get link mode in use instead of
speed and duplex parameters
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:21 AM Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com> wrote:
> + link_ksettings->link_mode = -1;
> + err = dev->ethtool_ops->get_link_ksettings(dev, link_ksettings);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + if (link_ksettings->link_mode != -1) {
> + link_info = &link_mode_params[link_ksettings->link_mode];
> + link_ksettings->base.speed = link_info->speed;
> + link_ksettings->lanes = link_info->lanes;
> + link_ksettings->base.duplex = link_info->duplex;
> + }
Why isn't this also handled using a capability bit as is done for
lanes? Is link_mode read-only? Should it / will it always be? If not,
can drivers also derive the other fields if asked to set link_mode?
That would be easy enough. Why don't we simply allow user space to set
link mode directly too (in addition to being able to constrain lanes
for autoneg or forced speeds)?
Regards,
Edwin Peer
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (4160 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists