netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ethtool and MII (was Re: initial acenic ZC cleanup)

To: Jes Sorensen <jes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ethtool and MII (was Re: initial acenic ZC cleanup)
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:13:56 -0500
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: MandrakeSoft
References: <200103082147.f28LlS301042@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <15015.65092.349145.143015@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <d3g0gnzzv7.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3AA80487.3C7E26A6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <d34rx3fzrm.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3AAAEEC8.9375ED6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <d3n1arnigr.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3AB8997D.A715CD35@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
My apologies, I should have added to that last message:

However, if there are tuning parameters which are used across many
drivers, go ahead and support them via ethtool, which is the common
kernel place for such things now.

Note that you'll probably want to create new ETHTOOL_xxx commands, if
you need more than the four reserved dwords we have left in struct
ethtool_cmd.

Further, if these new commands are not specific mainly to ethernet
drivers (ie. if TR or arcnet drivers could use your new feature), you
should probably create a new sock ioctl, instead of messing around with
the ethtool interface at all...

WDYT?

        Jeff


-- 
Jeff Garzik       | May you have warm words on a cold evening,
Building 1024     | a full mooon on a dark night,
MandrakeSoft      | and a smooth road all the way to your door.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>