netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH]sk98lin ethtool support

To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]sk98lin ethtool support
From: Mirko Lindner <demon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:37:22 +0000
Cc: krishnakumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mlindner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, felix@xxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3FF2170D.5070302@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <1072779867.3632.38.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3FF16F18.7060303@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <3FF19659.8030408@xxxxxxxxx> <3FF22333.2070004@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <3FF2170D.5070302@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031210
Jeff,

Well, understood, but we don't need vendor-specific, non-standard statistics when there is a standard method to export these statistics (ETHTOOl_GSTATS).

I agree with you.


Make sure you don't duplicate any ethtool functions. We don't need a NIC-specific diag tool either ;-) ethtool is the preferred method moving forward, as it's already shipping in most Linux distros.

Yes, we need it ;) No kidding! This is not a tool for SW checks like media, link or driver version checks, but a tool for HW checks like register, PROM, MAC, PHY and some other chip and card checks. The ethtool is a great tool, but the intention of this tool is not the same.

Mirko

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