On 2/6/2019 1:12 PM, Igor Ryzhov wrote: > Hi Ferruh, > > What's the plan with this patch?
Hi Igor, I just sent a deprecation notice for this: https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/50347/ If the deprecation notice approved, requires 3 acks, note will go into 19.05 And later this patch can go in 19.08 Thanks, ferruh > > Best regards, > Igor > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 7:55 PM Igor Ryzhov <iryz...@nfware.com > <mailto:iryz...@nfware.com>> wrote: > > Hi Ferruh, > > I answered in another thread. > > Regarding this patch – I have no objections now. > > Best regards, > Igor > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 9:17 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com > <mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com>> wrote: > > On 12/18/2018 9:20 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > On 12/18/2018 8:20 AM, Igor Ryzhov wrote: > >> Hi Ferruh, > >> > >> Please, look at my patch http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/48454/ and > consider > >> rebasing your patch over mine. > > > > Sorry about that, yes I will check it today. > > Hi Igor, > > I put some comments on your patch. > > As far as I can see it also has a target to remove current type of > ethtool > support, so this RFC should not be a concern to you. > All ethtool support can be removed, when you have an actual solution > for > driver > independent ethtool support only a little code needs to be added back. > > Thanks, > ferruh > > > > >> > >> As we discussed with Stephen, KNI needs to supply ethtool_ops with > >> .get_link function, to properly support link status. > >> So we should save ethtool_ops and implement .get_link using > standard > >> ethtool_op_get_link. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Igor > > > > >
