>>
>> struct net_device {
>> ...
>> #if defined(CONFIG_LIBFC) && defined(CONFIG_FCOE)
>> struct fcoe_data *fcoe_data;
>> #endif
>> ...
>> };
>
>A minor point, we only need to check CONFIG_FCOE if we're going to
>require both, since FCoE implies LIBFC, but no harm as it is.
Thanks, yes, FCOE is good enough here.> >I wonder if it would be acceptable to use a call through ethtool, >ioctl, or some other interface to get struct fcoe_data from the driver. >We could keep a pointer to fcoe_data in the fcoe_softc if critical, or >refetch it as needed if used infrequently. > >Any driver that doesn't know about this would return an error, since you >would use a previously-undefined command code. > >That way, you wouldn't require any changes to net_device. This scales >better as various other offloads are added. Well, this does scale better but I would prefer to have fcoe offload exposed in netdev directly by fcoe_data since it is cleaner to me, following the existing logic there in netdev. Anyway, I am not sure which one is more acceptable than the other. yi _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
