Re: [ethtool PATCH] ethtool: Add Direct Attach to the available connector ports
From: Jeff Garzik <hidden>
Date: 2009-11-29 10:42:29
On 11/29/2009 03:36 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Jeff Kirsher<redacted> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:13:15 -0800quoted
From: PJ Waskiewicz<redacted> This adds Direct Attach SFP+ types to the connector ports for the GSET mode. Signed-off-by: Peter P Waskiewicz Jr<redacted> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher<redacted>Jeff Garzik, ping?
These days, unless I have some massive objection, I merge stuff into ethtool when the kernel bits hit net-next. ethtool should be current as of net-next 24 hrs ago. I queued the ethtool patch in $subject, and was waiting on your kernel merge verdict.
Also, do you plan on doing any ethtool releases this century? :-)
I've been trying to think of what would be a good versioning scheme for
ethtool. Even though it is [essentially] a user-friendly kernel
interface, its releases have never really been closely synchronized with
the kernel releases. And unlike a lot of other software, ethtool is so
simple it does not really go through any release-candidate or beta period.
The current scheme just increments a release number: 5->6, 6->7, etc.
But with so few kernel releases (and thus ethtool releases), I was
leaning towards either yearly release naming ("ethtool-2009"), kernel
release naming ("ethtool-2.6.33"), or the release scheme proposed for
glibc: snapshot directly from the git repository.
If people want one, I could do a release right now. Or, we could move
to an alternate scheme like git snapshots. I think git snapshots are
viable because ethtool has historically had next to zero bugs in the
actual userland utility. Fedora already imports git snapshots, for example.
Preferences?
Jeff