> > @@ -634,10 +636,14 @@ static void dump_link_caps(const char *prefix, const
> > char *an_prefix,
> > "100baseT/Half" },
> > { 1, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_100baseT_Full_BIT,
> > "100baseT/Full" },
> > + { 1, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_100baseT1_Full_BIT,
> > + "100baseT1/Full" },
> > { 0, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseT_Half_BIT,
> > "1000baseT/Half" },
> > { 1, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseT_Full_BIT,
> > "1000baseT/Full" },
> > + { 1, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseT1_Full_BIT,
> > + "1000baseT1/Full" },
> > { 0, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseKX_Full_BIT,
> > "1000baseKX/Full" },
> > { 0, ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_2500baseX_Full_BIT,
>
> Does it mean that we could end up with lines like
>
> 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 100baseT1/Full
> 1000baseT/Full 1000baseT1/Full
>
> if there is a NIC supporting both T and T1?
Hi Michal
In theory, it is possible for a PHY to support both plain T and
T1. And a 1000BaseT could also implement 1000BaseT2 and 1000BaseT1.
I've not yet seen an actual PHY which does this though.
> It would
> be probably confusing for users as modes on the same line always were
> half/full duplex variants of the same.
I can clear the same_line flag.
> You should also add the new modes to ethtool.8.in.
Yes, will do.
Andrew
