lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next v3] ethtool: doc: clarify what drivers can implement in their get_drvinfo()
On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 16:52:39 +0900 Vincent MAILHOL wrote:
> - * @fw_version: Firmware version string; may be an empty string
> - * @erom_version: Expansion ROM version string; may be an empty string
> + * @fw_version: Firmware version string; drivers can set it; may be an
> + * empty string
> + * @erom_version: Expansion ROM version string; drivers can set it;
> + * may be an empty string

"drivers can set it" rings a little odd to my non-native-English-
-speaker's ear. Perhaps "driver-defined;" ? Either way is fine, tho.

> * @bus_info: Device bus address. This should match the dev_name()
> * string for the underlying bus device, if there is one. May be
> * an empty string.
> @@ -180,9 +182,10 @@ static inline __u32 ethtool_cmd_speed(const
> struct ethtool_cmd *ep)
> * Users can use the %ETHTOOL_GSSET_INFO command to get the number of
> * strings in any string set (from Linux 2.6.34).
> *
> - * Drivers should set at most @driver, @version, @fw_version and
> - * @bus_info in their get_drvinfo() implementation. The ethtool
> - * core fills in the other fields using other driver operations.
> + * Majority of the drivers should no longer implement the
> + * get_drvinfo() callback. Most fields are correctly filled in by the
> + * core using system information, or populated using other driver
> + * operations.

SG! Good point on the doc being for the struct. We can make the notice
even stronger if you want by saying s/Majority of the/Modern/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-15 17:29    [W:1.871 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site