netdev
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: RFC ethtool usage

from [David S. Miller] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RFC ethtool usage
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 20:01:08 -0700
Cc: brazilnut@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <427AD74B.10904@pobox.com>
References: <20050505234128.GA21736@us.ibm.com> <427AD74B.10904@pobox.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx 
On Thu, 05 May 2005 22:32:43 -0400
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Convenient in the short term, but misleading in the long run, IMO.
> 
> Surely you can get this info from an ethtool register dump?

I agree.  It might not be a bad idea to formalize this in some
generic "ethtool_chip_info" block, however.
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: RFC ethtool usage, Jeff Garzik
Next by Date:  Re: oops in ip_rcv, David S. Miller
Previous by Thread:  Re: RFC ethtool usage, Jeff Garzik
Next by Thread:  [TG3]: Add tagged status support, David S. Miller
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]