Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-74918-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 15:40:06 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?S8O2cnk=?= Maincent <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@davemloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Paolo Abeni
 <pabeni@redhat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Luis Chamberlain
 <mcgrof@kernel.org>, Russ Weight <russ.weight@linux.dev>, Greg
 Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
 <rafael@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
 Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
 Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>, Heiner Kallweit
 <hkallweit1@gmail.com>, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, Thomas
 Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
 devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Dent Project <dentproject@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 05/17] net: pse-pd: Introduce PSE types
 enumeration
Message-ID: <20240221154006.7ad2d66d@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
In-Reply-To: <11225a0d-bdc4-459c-9258-c9da217cc89e@lunn.ch>
References: <20240215-feature_poe-v4-0-35bb4c23266c@bootlin.com>
	<20240215-feature_poe-v4-5-35bb4c23266c@bootlin.com>
	<20240215105846.6dd48886@kernel.org>
	<20240216104211.2c11d1cc@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
	<20240216173638.4bb12af2@kernel.org>
	<20240219160456.0b5e8de3@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
	<11225a0d-bdc4-459c-9258-c9da217cc89e@lunn.ch>
Organization: bootlin
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:44:34 +0100
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 04:04:56PM +0100, K=C3=B6ry Maincent wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 17:36:38 -0800
> > Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote: =20
> > > > > but why the separate header? Is it going to be used in other part=
s of
> > > > > uAPI than just in ethtool?     =20
> > > >=20
> > > > We might use it in pse core if capabilities between PoE and PoDL di=
ffer
> > > > but I am not sure about it.
> > > > Do you prefer to move it to ethtool header and add prefix ETHTOOL_ =
to
> > > > the enum values?   =20
> > >=20
> > > I don't know enough to have an opinion :) Whatever you end up doing,
> > > it's probably worth documenting the reason for the choice in the comm=
it
> > > message? =20
> >=20
> > Mmh, I am still not sure of the best choice on this. I think I will mov=
e it
> > to ethtool as you suggested. =20
>=20
> kAPI is hard to change. So it is worth thinking about it.
>=20
> Can you think of any possible kAPI not using ethtool netlink? Its not
> going to be ioctl. We generally don't export new things in /sysfs if
> we have netlink, etc.
>=20
> So to me, it is only going to be used be the ethtool API, so i would
> follow the usual conventions for ethtool.

Oops sorry forgot to reply to you.
Indeed I reached to the same conclusion on my side.

Regards,
--=20
K=C3=B6ry Maincent, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com