On Mon, 2014-05-19 at 09:36 +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Lars Melin lars...@gmail.com writes:
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
[adding Greg Suarez to the Cc list after noticing that he was missing
from this thread. Sorry Greg, that was not my intention. This
discussion is just as relevant to cdc_mbim as to cdc_ncm, defining a
new common userspace API for all the cdc_ncm based drivers]
Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no
Lars Melin lars...@gmail.com writes:
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
...@vger.kernel.org,
==linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, alexey.oris...@gmail.com, oli...@neukum.org,
==mrkiko...@gmail.com, david.lai...@aculab.com
==Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/12] cdc_ncm: add buffer tuning and stats
==using ethtool
==
==Bjørn Mork wrote:
== Just make doubly sure that you
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,
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
From: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no
Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 16:50:30 +0200
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
I would swap module param and ioctl, module params are the least
David Miller da...@davemloft.net writes:
From: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 21:48:17 +0200
Quoting the previous description of this series (skip to the
changelog below if you only want a summary of the changes):
Ok I'm fine with this, applied to net-next.
Thanks.
Just
Bjørn Mork wrote:
Just make doubly sure that you will be ok, for a long time, with using
the ethtool coalescing interface for configuring this because you'll
really be stuck with this forever.
Yes, I am painfull aware of that. So I was hoping someone would jump at
this and say something
Quoting the previous description of this series (skip to the
changelog below if you only want a summary of the changes):
I have got quite a few reports from frustrated users of OpenWRT
hosts trying to use some powerful LTE modem, but not achieving
full speed. This is typically caused by a
From: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 21:48:17 +0200
Quoting the previous description of this series (skip to the
changelog below if you only want a summary of the changes):
Ok I'm fine with this, applied to net-next.
Just make doubly sure that you will be ok, for a long time,
11 matches
Mail list logo
