Re: [RFC PATCH 2/9] ethtool: introduce ethtool netlink interface

[David Miller]

From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 19:02:19 +0100

> The discussion we had before was about flag bitfield that was there
> *always*. In this case, that is not true. It is either ifindex or
> ifname. Even rtnetlink has ifname as attribute.
> 
> The flags and info_mask is just big mystery. If it is per-command,
> seems natural to have it as attributes.

I think flags and info_mask indeed can be moved out of this struct.

I guess, in this case, I can see your point of view especially if we
allow ethtool operations on non-netdev entities.

So, ok, let's move forward without a base command struct and just
use attributes.

Thanks :)