Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
To:     netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        John Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 13/17] ethtool: add standard notification handler
Date:   Fri, 11 Oct 2019 07:59:41 +0200
Message-ID: <9029806.L7hU43c9um@alaris>
Organization: SuSE
In-Reply-To: <20191011055619.GC2901@nanopsycho>
References: <cover.1570654310.git.mkubecek@suse.cz> <20191010181743.GF22163@unicorn.suse.cz> <20191011055619.GC2901@nanopsycho>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Friday, 11 October 2019 7:56 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 08:17:43PM CEST, mkubecek@suse.cz wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 05:25:59PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 10:59:40PM CEST, mkubecek@suse.cz wrote:
> [...]
> 
> >> >+
> >> >+/* generic notification handler */
> >> >+static void ethnl_std_notify(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int
> >> >cmd,>> 
> >> Better "common" comparing to "standard", I believe.
> >
> >That's similar to ethnl_std_parse(), the idea is that this is the
> >standard handler for notifications which are triggered without
> >additional data and the message is the same as reply to corresponding
> >"GET" request (which is generated by the standard ethnl_get_doit()
> >handler). Notifications for actions and notifications for SET
> >commands which cannot be generated this standard way will have to
> >use their own (nonstandard) handler.
> 
> So "default"? The "standard" sounds rather weird to me. It isn't any
> "standard" :)

Yes, "default" sounds fine.

Michal