Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 05:09:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 05:09:03 -0500 Received: from se1.cogenit.fr ([195.68.53.173]:5137 "EHLO se1.cogenit.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 05:08:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 10:38:15 +0100 From: Francois Romieu To: Ivan Passos Cc: Linux Kernel List , Philip Blundell , netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [RFC-2] Configuring Synchronous Interfaces in Linux Message-ID: <20001205103815.A25405@se1.cogenit.fr> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3us In-Reply-To: X-Organisation: Marie's fan club Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ivan Passos ?crit : [...] > Anyhow, the parameters we currently need to configure on our board (the > PC300) are as follows: > > - Media: V.35, RS-232, X.21, T1, E1 drivers/net/wan/lmc/lmc_media.c:65 char *lmc_t1_cables[] = { "V.10/RS423", "EIA530A", "reserved", "X.21", "V.35", "EIA449/EIA530/V.36", "V.28/EIA232", "none", NULL }; (Where it's used btw). I don't exactly see the point here: do some of your cards supports these media at the same time ? I would have believed it to be set in stone. > - Protocol: Frame Relay, (Cisco)-HDLC, PPP, X.25 (not sure whether that is > already supported by the 'hw' option) + Transparent HDLC ? > - Clock: 'ext' (or 0, which implies external clock) or some numeric value > > 0 (which implies internal clock); setting it to 'int' would set > it to some fixed numeric value > 0 (useful for T1/E1 links, just > to indicate master clock as opposed to slave or 'ext' clock) Ok. [...] > - T1/E1 only: > - Line code: > - Frame mode: > - LBO (T1 only): line-build-out > - Rx Sensitivity: short-haul or long-haul > - Active channels: mask that represents the possible 24/32 > channels (timeslots) on a T1/E1 line May I ask what kind of protocol support you have in mind here ? > I'm sure that _all_ the other sync cards need to configure the _same_ > parameters (or a subset of them), and there may be cards that need even > more parameters (but we have to start somewhere ... ;). So having a > unified interface and making the drivers compliant to it is not that hard > and surely would help users to dump the currently ridiculous set of > individual config. tools for these cards (yes, we currently have our own > pc300cfg, along with the -- not absolute -- "standard" sethdlc utility). > > I'm willing to go for this implementation, but I wanted to know first: > - whether ifconfig is the right place to do it; We can pass (media/clock) through his "media" parameter but I won't claim it to be sexy. So far, I don't see how we may avoid some tool to do all the required ioctl. > - where I should create the new ioctl's to handle these new parameters. drivers/net/wan/sbni.[ch] uses the SIOCDEVPRIVATE range for different things. The x25 protocol uses the SIOCPROTOPRIVATE. I'd rather avoid both. > Suggestions / comments are more than welcome. -- Ueimor - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/