[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKOOJTw75uLVPpzV1a85SFsO7Gz9bcfS9M1CWHQONCfMLC4H6g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 13:05:10 -0800
From: Edwin Peer <edwin.peer@...adcom.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>,
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
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 Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 12:29 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > I think it should be deterministic. It should be possible to select
> > the appropriate mode either based on the current media type or the
> > current link mode (which implies a media type). Alternatively, if the
> > user space request only specifies a subset, such as speed, fall back
> > to the existing behaviour and don't supply the request to the driver
> > in the form of a compound link mode in those cases (perhaps indicating
> > this by not setting the capability bit). The former approach has the
> > potential to tidy up drivers if we decide that drivers providing the
> > capability can ignore the other fields and rely solely on link mode,
> > the latter is no worse than what we have today.
>
> The media part is beginning to sound concerning. Every time we
> under-specify an interface we end up with #vendors different
> interpretations. And since HW is programmed by FW in most high
> speed devices we can't even review the right thing is done.
Each link mode implies a very specific media type, the kernel can
reject illegal combinations based on the supported bitmask before
calling upon the driver to select it.
Regards,
Edwin Peer
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (4160 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists