Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:38:06 -0700 | From | Jakub Kicinski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 7/7] netdev_features: convert NETIF_F_FCOE_MTU to IFF_FCOE_MTU |
| |
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 15:37:31 +0200 Alexander Lobakin wrote: > Ability to handle maximum FCoE frames of 2158 bytes can never be changed > and thus more of an attribute, not a toggleable feature. > Move it from netdev_features_t to netdev_priv_flags and free one more > feature bit.
> @@ -1700,6 +1701,7 @@ enum netdev_priv_flags { > IFF_NETNS_LOCAL = BIT_ULL(35), > IFF_HIGHDMA = BIT_ULL(36), > IFF_VLAN_CHALLENGED = BIT_ULL(37), > + IFF_FCOE_MTU = BIT_ULL(38), > IFF_LOGICAL = IFF_NO_QUEUE | IFF_LLTX, > IFF_ONE_FOR_ALL = IFF_HIGHDMA | IFF_VLAN_CHALLENGED, > IFF_ALL_FOR_ALL = IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE |
Any reason not to make it a bitfield? I haven't looked at the longer patches but this one seems to be used like a basic bool.
> diff --git a/net/ethtool/common.c b/net/ethtool/common.c > index 2de4dd5a30de..71e36e1a1b15 100644 > --- a/net/ethtool/common.c > +++ b/net/ethtool/common.c > @@ -47,7 +47,6 @@ const char netdev_features_strings[NETDEV_FEATURE_COUNT][ETH_GSTRING_LEN] = { > > [NETIF_F_FCOE_CRC_BIT] = "tx-checksum-fcoe-crc", > [NETIF_F_SCTP_CRC_BIT] = "tx-checksum-sctp", > - [NETIF_F_FCOE_MTU_BIT] = "fcoe-mtu",
But this definitely _is_ a uAPI change, right? Some analysis why this is fine and why avoiding the problem isn't worth it in the cover letter would be great.
> [NETIF_F_NTUPLE_BIT] = "rx-ntuple-filter", > [NETIF_F_RXHASH_BIT] = "rx-hashing", > [NETIF_F_RXCSUM_BIT] = "rx-checksum",
| |