From: Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:34:12 +0100
> On Sat, 2016-06-11 at 19:26 -0700, David Miller wrote: >> From: Vidya Sagar Ravipati <vi...@cumulusnetworks.com> >> Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 16:22:38 -0700 >> >> > As part of ethtool application, application is requesting the drivers >> > to provide the supported eeprom size to allocate memory buffer for >> > getting complete dump. >> >> And the right way to do that is the driver requests the eeprom info >> with a buffer size of zero, then the driver fills in the size field >> for what the size actually is. >> >> Then the application can allocate the proper buffer size and rerun >> the eeprom request. >> >> Putting endless values for each and every eeprom type a device has is >> just rediculous. >> >> I'm not going to continue promoting this broken and unscalable scheme, >> we have to fix this. > > I don't think there's nothing broken here. ethtool doesn't use those > macros, the drivers do. If it's a value only for the drivers, then why does it need to be in a public UAPI header file and exported outside of the kernel at all? If it's a private driver detail, it should live in the driver.
