Thread (22 messages) 22 messages, 6 authors, 2021-10-27

Re: [PATCH V4 net-next 4/6] ethtool: extend ringparam setting uAPI with rx_buf_len

From: huangguangbin (A) <hidden>
Date: 2021-10-26 14:41:31
Also in: linux-s390


On 2021/10/26 3:01, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
On 25.10.2021 10:45:05, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
quoted
quoted
The approach Andrew suggested is two-fold. First introduce a "struct
ethtool_kringparam" that's only used inside the kernel, as "struct
ethtool_ringparam" is ABI. Then extend "struct ethtool_kringparam" as
needed.
Indeed, there are different ways to extend the API for drivers,
I think it comes down to personal taste. I find the "inheritance"
models in C (kstruct usually contains the old struct as some "base")
awkward.

I don't think we have agreed-on best practice in the area.
 From my point of view, if there already is an extension mainline:

| https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/?id=f3ccfda19319

I'm more in the flavor for modeling other extensions the same way. Would
be more consistent to name the new struct "kernel_"ethtool_ringparam,
following the coalescing example:

| struct kernel_ethtool_ringparam {
|        __u32   rx_buf_len;
| };

regards,
Marc
We think ethtool_ringparam_ext is more easy to understand it is extension of
struct ethtool_ringparam. However, we don't mind to keep the same way and modify
to the name kernel_ethtool_ringparam if everyone agrees.

Does anyone have other opinions?
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help