On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 13:23 -0400, sowmini.varadhan at sun.com wrote:
> On (08/15/07 10:11), Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> > > > none
> > > > we-detected-and-sent-a-remote-fault
> > > > we-received-remove-fault-from-peer
> > >
> > > so, in that case, what's the man page talking about? :-?
> >
> > I have no idea. But there are only two bits in the MII register. One
> > for sending a remote fault indiciation, and one for receiving it.
> >
> > Maybe they are talking about parallel detection faults?
>
> Well, there's another bug (man page fix) waiting to be filed.
>
> > >
> > > LINK PARAM STATE AUTONEG SPEED/DUPLEX PAUSE
> > > bge0 current up on 1G/f 1
> > > capable -- on 1G/f/h,100M/f/h,10M/f/h 1
> > > adv -- on 1G/f 1
> > > peeradv -- on 1G/f 1
> >
> > Yeah, its kind of hard to represent this cleanly.
> >
> > Maybe it doesn't make sense to include the STATE field here. There are
> > other ways to get this information. (dladm show-dev reports it, for
> > example.)
> >
> > For AUTONEG, I'd prefer "yes/no" to "on/off". (Maybe just a personal
> > preference.) You might be able to get some more horizontal room by
> > shortening AUTONEG to just AUTO.
>
> I'd leave the state there, and shrink autoneg to "auto"- state's
> kind of useful to have in show-ether, without having an extra
> indirection to another command.
>
> > 1000FH, 100FH, 10F <-- 1G, 100, 10, all duplex modes)
> > 1000F <-- 1G full
> > 10H <-- 10 half
> > 10000F <-- 10G
> >
> > I don't know if that is any easier to parse, or not.
>
> It's confusing, for the gigabit case (too many zeros!). How about
> something like this instead:
>
> 1G-both <- 1G full, half
> 10M-half <- 10M half only
> 100M-full <- 100M full only.
>
> and the column title then becomes "SPEED-DUPLEX"
That could work.
-- Garrett
>
> --Sowmini
