Subject: Re: the future of ethtool

From: Stephen Hemminger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:14:53 -0800

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 21:14:02 +0000
Ben Hutchings <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 12:44 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> [...]
> > My views are simple:
> > 
> > Ethtool needs to be an extension of existing netlink API for interfaces.
> >   - handles multiple values per transaction
> >   - extensible
> [...]
> 
> Are you suggesting to send and receive the existing ethtool command and
> result structures (with some wrapping) through netlink?  Or some larger
> change to the API?

The existing ioctl base API should be kept as legacy and something
better developed.