On 28/09/18 17:45, Andrew Lunn wrote: > Now is a good time to change the API, since we are moving to a netlink > socket. Which is why these questions were asked in the first place... OK, well, I've posted sfc's semantics and view-from-the-hardware*; now patiently waiting for other NIC vendors to chime in so we can try to converge on something consistent. Then again, since they've been CCed since the original patch three weeks ago, we might be waiting a while :-(
Regarding Ariel Almog's suggested semantics, it seems like they have the 'auto' bit just encoding 'more than one non-auto bit', which is redundant (i.e. off|rs is always off|rs|auto, whereas rs is never rs|auto). I don't see how that would be useful. -Ed * One complication I left out: we actually have _three_ pairs of sup/req bits, because we separate 'BaseR for 10G/40G/100G' from 'BaseR for 25G/50G'. I don't know the details of why our HW does this (or why 100G isn't lumped in with the other 25ers) but I think it has to do with Horrific Ethernet Spec Arcana Man Was Not Meant To Know™.
