Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Dec 2022 17:17:28 +0100 | From | Piergiorgio Beruto <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 1/5] net/ethtool: add netlink interface for the PLCA RS |
| |
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 05:06:42PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 04:42:15PM +0100, Piergiorgio Beruto wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 03:16:00PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > > TBH I can't parse the "ETHTOOL_A_PLCA_VERSION is reported as 0Axx > > > > > where.." sentence. Specifically I'm confused about what the 0A is. > > > > How about this: "When this standard is supported, the upper byte of > > > > ``ETHTOOL_A_PLCA_VERSION`` shall be 0x0A (see Table A.1.0 — IDVER > > > > bits assignment). > > > > > > I think the 0x0A is pointless and should not be included here. If the > > > register does not contain 0x0A, the device does not follow the open > > > alliance standard, and hence the lower part of the register is > > > meaningless. > > > > > > This is why i suggested -ENODEV should actually be returned on invalid > > > values in this register. > > I already integrated this change in v5 (returning -ENODEV). Give what you're > > saying, I can just remove that sentence from the documentations. Agreed? > > And only return the actual version value, not the 0x0A. About this, at the moment I am reporting the 0x0A to allow in the future possible extensions of the standard. A single byte for the version may be too limited given this technology is relatively fresh. What you think of this?
| |