Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Michal Kubecek
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 11:06:53PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 10:59:17AM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote: > > How about this compromise? Let's introduce a "legacy" flag which would > > allow "ethtool -s autoneg on" do what it used to do while we would > > not taint the kernel

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Ido Schimmel
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 10:59:17AM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote: > How about this compromise? Let's introduce a "legacy" flag which would > allow "ethtool -s autoneg on" do what it used to do while we would > not taint the kernel-userspace API with this special case so that > ETHTOOL_MSG_LINKMODES_

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Ido Schimmel
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:35:31PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/net/ethtool/linkmodes.c#L2 Should be: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/net/ethtool/linkmodes.c#L290

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Ido Schimmel
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 04:19:09PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > I don't think so. Doing: > > > > > > # ethtool -s eth0 autoneg > > > > > > Is a pretty established behavior to enable all the supported advertise > > > bits. > > I would disagree. phylib will return -EINVAL for this. This has no

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Andrew Lunn
> > I don't think so. Doing: > > > > # ethtool -s eth0 autoneg > > > > Is a pretty established behavior to enable all the supported advertise > > bits. I would disagree. phylib will return -EINVAL for this. int phy_ethtool_ksettings_set(struct phy_device *phydev, c

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Michal Kubecek
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 10:25:29AM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 06:44:55PM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 07:02:47PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > > diff --git a/net/ethtool/linkmodes.c b/net/ethtool/linkmodes.c > > > index 7044a2853886..a9458c7620

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-30 Thread Ido Schimmel
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 06:44:55PM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 07:02:47PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > From: Ido Schimmel > > > > With the ioctl interface, when autoneg is enabled, but without > > specifying speed, duplex or link modes, the advertised link modes are >

Re: [RFC PATCH net] ethtool: Fix incompatibility between netlink and ioctl interfaces

2020-09-29 Thread Michal Kubecek
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 07:02:47PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > From: Ido Schimmel > > With the ioctl interface, when autoneg is enabled, but without > specifying speed, duplex or link modes, the advertised link modes are > set to the supported link modes by the ethtool user space utility. > [..