On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:04 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Saeed Mahameed <sae...@mellanox.com>
> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:33:42 +0300
>
>> Upon ethtool request to set speed to 0 we handle it as a special request
>> to reset link modes to Device's defaults.
>>
>> Fixes: f62b8bb8f2d3 ("net/mlx5: Extend mlx5_core to support ConnectX-4
>> Ethernet functionality")
>> Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <sae...@mellanox.com>
>
> Please don't try to sneak things like this into the patches you submit.
>No one is trying to sneak things here, This patch is transparent enough and well documented, it is not fair to call it "sneaking" ! I am glad this is what you think about the patch, but i am a little bit stunned of what you think about me . > If you continue to add weird stuff like this, I will never _ever_ be > able to trust you guys and have a high degree of confidence in your > changes. If you continue like this, I will always have to audit your > patches very strictly which is very time consuming for me. > Well i wanted to argue on why i think it is ok to treat speed=0 as special reset request, but I also kinda agree with you on this, I won't waste more of your time on this. I hope I won't disappoint you in the future, after all we learn from the best. > Do not extend ethtool's semantics in a way which suits you specifically. > > If we want to have this semantic, you must first propose it as a > global semantic which then in turn can be adopted by all drivers > supporting ethtool. > Sure thing, will drop this patch now, and will improve it later. Thank you.
