Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752134AbdLKSpw (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Dec 2017 13:45:52 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:38240 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750759AbdLKSpv (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Dec 2017 13:45:51 -0500 Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 13:45:47 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20171211.134547.711629508042364482.davem@davemloft.net> To: jiri@resnulli.us Cc: mkubecek@suse.cz, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/9] ethtool: introduce ethtool netlink interface From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20171211180219.GB2047@nanopsycho> References: <20171211160221.GA1885@nanopsycho> <20171211.115651.1046181633998981619.davem@davemloft.net> <20171211180219.GB2047@nanopsycho> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.12 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Mon, 11 Dec 2017 10:45:50 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 659 Lines: 19 From: Jiri Pirko Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 19:02:19 +0100 > The discussion we had before was about flag bitfield that was there > *always*. In this case, that is not true. It is either ifindex or > ifname. Even rtnetlink has ifname as attribute. > > The flags and info_mask is just big mystery. If it is per-command, > seems natural to have it as attributes. I think flags and info_mask indeed can be moved out of this struct. I guess, in this case, I can see your point of view especially if we allow ethtool operations on non-netdev entities. So, ok, let's move forward without a base command struct and just use attributes. Thanks :)