Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 21 Aug 2018 16:10:22 +0200 | From | Andrew Lunn <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 10/17] ethtool: implement GET_SETTINGS message |
| |
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 11:32:46AM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote: > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 08:54:55PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > +/* Internal kernel helper to query a device ethtool_link_settings. > > > + * > > > + * Backward compatibility note: for compatibility with legacy drivers > > > + * that implement only the ethtool_cmd API, this has to work with both > > > + * drivers implementing get_link_ksettings API and drivers > > > + * implementing get_settings API. When drivers implement get_settings > > > + * and report ethtool_cmd deprecated fields > > > + * (transceiver/maxrxpkt/maxtxpkt), these fields are silently ignored > > > + * because the resulting struct ethtool_link_settings does not report them. > > > > ~/linux/drivers$ grep -r [.]get_settings * > > net/ethernet/8390/etherh.c: .get_settings = etherh_get_settings, > > > > I don't think it is worth adding support for .get_settings for just > > one driver. It is better to just convert that driver to the new API. > > I have prepared a patch converting 8390/etherh driver to use > {g,s}et_link_ksettings and I'm going to submit it when net-next opens. > Do you think we can then drop {g,s}et_settings callbacks completely > (i.e. also from ioctl() code and ethtool_ops)? Do we care about > unconverted out of tree drivers?
Hi Michal
We cannot break ethtool, the ABI it uses. But there is already code to use get_link_ksettings() and only fall back to get_settings if it does not exist. So we can clean up all the fallback code, remove the ethtool_ops, etc.
I personally don't care about out of tree drivers. They have had over 2 years to change to the new API.
Andrew
|  |