On 2014-05-18 21:50, Bjørn Mork wrote:
I could be wrong, but my impression is that the userspace API
preferences for network devices are
1. ethtool
2. sysfs
3. module param
..
99. ioctl
This is the primary reason why I was looking for someplace to put this
within the existing ethtool API. Using sysfs would have worked fine
too, I guess. But is there any real advantage, making it worth a
switch? I am all open to change to sysfs instead before v3.16 is
released, *if* there are good reasons to do it. And no objections. But
I do want more of a reason than the fact that it can be done. Maybe I
got the preferred order wrong?
I ruled out module parameters early because I believe there are real use
cases requiring different settings per device. The limited host system
resources will of course affect all devices on a single host the same
way. But not all devices can cope with the reduced buffers. So there
should be some way to tune two devices connected to the same host
differently.
I am not going to say anything about ioctls :-)
Bjørn
--
Your target audience is embedded systems with limited cpu power and
buffer memory, right?
If so, then you can't expect them to have ethtool included and their
developers are not likely to be happy over having to "waste" another
100KB in order to tune a 20KB driver.
My vote goes for sysfs.
/Lars
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
