[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210527103745.5005b5df@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 10:37:45 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Huazhong Tan <tanhuazhong@...wei.com>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<salil.mehta@...wei.com>, <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
<huangdaode@...wei.com>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
<dledford@...hat.com>, <jgg@...pe.ca>, <netanel@...zon.com>,
<akiyano@...zon.com>, <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
<irusskikh@...vell.com>, <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
<edwin.peer@...adcom.com>, <rohitm@...lsio.com>,
<jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
<ioana.ciornei@....com>, <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
<sgoutham@...vell.com>, <sbhatta@...vell.com>, <saeedm@...dia.com>,
<ecree.xilinx@...il.com>, <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
<merez@...eaurora.org>, <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 2/4] ethtool: extend coalesce setting uAPI with
CQE mode
On Thu, 27 May 2021 10:00:44 +0800 Huazhong Tan wrote:
> >> @@ -179,6 +179,8 @@ __ethtool_get_link_ksettings(struct net_device *dev,
> >>
> >> struct kernel_ethtool_coalesce {
> >> struct ethtool_coalesce base;
> >> + __u32 use_cqe_mode_tx;
> >> + __u32 use_cqe_mode_rx;
> > No __ in front, this is not a user space structure.
> > Why not bool or a bitfield?
>
> bool is enough, __u32 is used here to be consistent with
>
> fields in struct ethtool_coalesce.
>
> This seems unnecessary?
Yup, I think the IOCTL made everything a __u32 for uniformity
of the uAPI and to avoid holes and paddings. This is an internal
kernel structure so natural types like bool are better.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists