|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|
|References:||<1072779867.3632.38.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3FF16F18.7060303@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <3FF19659.8030408@xxxxxxxxx> <3FF22333.2070004@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <3FF2170D.5070302@xxxxxxxxx>|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031210|
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.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [PATCH]sk98lin ethtool support, Mirko Lindner|
|Next by Date:||[PATCH] [bonding 2.4] Fix compilation warning in bond_alb.c, Amir Noam|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [PATCH]sk98lin ethtool support, Jeff Garzik|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [PATCH 11/19] bonding cleanup 2.4 - Re-org struct bonding members, Jeff Garzik|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|