On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 17:48:35 +0200 Greg KH wrote: > > It's not just that it's not the preferred way.. I believe I promised > > that we wouldn't add anything more to this interface. And then I broke > > that promise, promising that it would never happen again. So much for > > my integrity. > > > > This all looks very nice to me, and the results are great, and it's just > > another knob... > > > > Please no more sysfs files for stuff like this. This turns into > vendor-specific random files that no one knows how to change over time > with no way to know what userspace tools are accessing them, or if even > anyone is using them at all. > > Shouldn't there be standard ethtool apis for this? Not yet, but there should. We can add the new params to struct kernel_ethtool_coalesce, and plumb them thru ethtool netlink. No major surgery required. Feel free to ask for more guidance if the netlink-y stuff is confusing.
