On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:56:00 -0700 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 10:54:08 +0200 Kory Maincent wrote: > [...] > > > > As I described it in the documentation it replaces SIOCGHWTSTAMP: > > "Any process can read the actual configuration by requesting tsinfo netlink > > socket ETHTOOL_MSG_TSINFO_GET with ETHTOOL_MSG_TSINFO_GHWTSTAMP netlink > > attribute set. > > > > The legacy usage is to pass this structure to ioctl(SIOCGHWTSTAMP) in the > > same way as the ioctl(SIOCSHWTSTAMP). However, this has not been > > implemented in all drivers." > > I did see the words, just didn't get the meaning :> Couple of years > from now hopefully newcomers won't even know ioctls exited, and > therefore what they did. From the user perspective the gist AFAIU is > that instead of *supported* we'll return what's currently *configured*. > > This feels a little bit too much like a muxed operation for me :( > Can we create a separate commands for TSCONFIG_GET / _SET ? > Granted it will be higher LOC, but hopefully cleaner ? > Or we can add the configured as completely new attrs, but changing > meaning of existing attrs based on a request flag.. 🙂↔️️ Ok so, you prefer to use a separate command to manage the hwtstamp configurations. Keeping TSINFO for reading the hwtstamp capabilities. I will bring back the TS_GET and TS_SET I have used from an older version of this patch series but renaming it to TSCONFIG ;) > [...] > > > > I am not a naming expert but "hwtstamp_provider" is the struct name I have > > used to describe hwtstamp index + qualifier and the prefix of the netlink > > nested attribute, so IMHO it fits well. > > Have you another proposition to clarify what you would expect? > > Oh, I just meant that it's way to long. I know y'all youngsters use > IDEs but I have it on good authority that there's still people in > this community who use text editors they wrote themselves, and those > lack auto-completion.. It's good to be more concise. Don't have too high expectations of me, I am still using vim. Maybe I belong also to the "old" people. ;) Now that we can reach 100 characters by line we can write variable names as long as we want! ^^ I will look for a shorter name then. Regards, -- Köry Maincent, Bootlin Embedded Linux and kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
