Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 08/16] mlx4_en: Reporting HW revision in ethtool -i

From: Ben Hutchings <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 15:46:45 +0000

On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 15:10 +0000, Yevgeny Petrilin wrote:
> > 
> > This is an abuse of the ethtool_drvinfo::driver field.
> > 
> > Your users can use lspci -v, can't they?
> > 
> I don't think there is a problem here.
> We have always reported the HW model via Ethtool, we just expanded the information
> we provide.
> Our users prefer to see the information in ethtool.

Do you mean 'we documented ethtool -i as the way to get hardware
identification'?  That would be a bug in your documentation.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.