On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:11:16PM +0000, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Here is a patch I have locally that would be useful for Bill Paul,
> I think. I know, we could use "flag0" for this, but it seems to
> me that this will be an increasingly common option in hadware.
Should this be implemented as a shared option like this? I ask because
NetBSD has added the following types and only has one shared option
left:
#define IFM_FLOW 0x00400000 /* enable hardware flow control */
#define IFM_FLAG0 0x01000000 /* Driver defined flag */
#define IFM_FLAG1 0x02000000 /* Driver defined flag */
#define IFM_FLAG2 0x04000000 /* Driver defined flag */
#define IFM_LOOP 0x08000000 /* Put hardware in loopback */
Personaly I don't think I would have wasted 3/8th of the shared options
on the abomination known as flags...
-- Brooks
--
Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE.
PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4
PGP signature
