[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] ethtool_ops rev 4

To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ethtool_ops rev 4
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:34:39 -0700
Cc: willy@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3F2AEB33.9050506@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <20030801150232.GV22222@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030801154021.GA7696@xxxxxxx> <20030801154656.GW22222@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030801162536.GA18574@xxxxxxx> <20030801132037.3f3542ae.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3F2AE91D.5090705@xxxxxxxxx> <3F2AEB33.9050506@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 18:35:31 -0400
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> We want to provide a sane, ifdef-free path to kcompat, where feasible.

I don't believe it's possible with netdev_ops, without
undoing the entire purpose of what netdev_ops is trying
to accomplish (elimination of code duplication).

Show me, in code not words, how you are able to accomplish
this with SET_NETDEV_OPS() or whatever.  I will not read
english text describing the scheme, I will read only code :)

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