On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 13:52 -0700, David Miller wrote:

From: Stephen Hemminger <redacted>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:51:09 -0700

quoted

I have no problem with dropping or changing the sysfs feature output.
It is useful to have a way to check if device supports something.

These days that's not even where we store the "capabilities" of the
device.

That happens in ->hw_features now.

In fact there never used to be any way for user-space to find out which
capabilities were *supported*, other than to try enabling them.

Once we work out how to deal with kernel-named features in ethtool it
shouldn't be too hard to add options to (quietly) test whether a given
feature is supported or enabled.  Having done that, we could think about
a fallback to sysfs and knowledge of the bit definitions for older
kernel versions.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.