| To: | Roger Luethi <rl@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] ethtool semantics |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:57:23 -0700 |
| Cc: | jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040607212804.GA17012@k3.hellgate.ch> |
| References: | <20040607212804.GA17012@k3.hellgate.ch> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 23:28:04 +0200 Roger Luethi <rl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What is the correct response if a user passes ethtool speed or duplex > arguments while autoneg is on? Some possible answers are: > > a) Yell at the user for doing something stupid. > > b) Fail silently (i.e. ignore command). > > c) Change advertised value accordingly and initiate new negotiation. > > d) Consider "autoneg off" implied, force media accordingly. > > The ethtool(8) man page I'm looking at doesn't address that question. The > actual behavior I've seen is b) which is by far my least preferred > solution. speed and duplex fields should be silently ignored in this case |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] natsemi update 1/4 Use assigned MAC address, Stephen Hemminger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] natsemi update 1/4 Use assigned MAC address, Mark Smith |
| Previous by Thread: | [RFC] ethtool semantics, Roger Luethi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] ethtool semantics, Marc Herbert |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |