Hi, On 04/11/16 13:03, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 11:35:38AM +0100, Allan W. Nielsen wrote: > > From: Raju Lakkaraju <raju.lakkar...@microsemi.com> > > > > Defines a generic API to get/set phy tunables. The API is using the > > existing ethtool_tunable/tunable_type_id types which is already being used > > for mac level tunables. > > > > Signed-off-by: Raju Lakkaraju <raju.lakkar...@microsemi.com> > > Signed-off-by: Allan W. Nielsen <allan.niel...@microsemi.com> > > --- > > include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h | 7 ++++++- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h b/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h > > index 8e54723..fd0bd36 100644 > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h > > @@ -248,6 +248,10 @@ struct ethtool_tunable { > > void *data[0]; > > }; > > > > +enum phy_tunable_id { > > + ETHTOOL_PHY_ID_UNSPEC, > > +}; > > Do you have any idea what this is for? A grep for > ETHTOOL_TUNABLE_UNSPEC does not turn up anything. It is not used...
It was "just" to mimic how "tunable_type_id/ETHTOOL_TUNABLE_UNSPEC" (and other) is done. The thinking was that we did not want an "ID" of zero do to anything - because that could mean the programmer had forgot to set the field... I have on strong feelings about this, please let us know if you would like this done in an other way. /Allan