On 29.11.2016 18:34, Francesco Giudici wrote: > > > On 29/11/2016 13:36, Bjørn Mork wrote: >> Thomas Haller <[email protected]> writes: >>> On Tue, 2016-11-29 at 10:23 +0100, Francesco Giudici wrote: >>> >>>>> I would say yes. Half duplex setting is invalid for gigabit network >>>>> speed. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yeah, I think so. I should also have got a warning from NM in your >>>> journal logs stating that configuring the 1000Mb/Half failed (search >>>> for >>>> "set-link"). >>>> Thanks >>>> Francesco >>> >>> I think then NM should reject such invalid configurations right way. >>> I mean, really reject as invalid, not silently normalize away. >> >> I agree. There is no way for NM to figure out if the user meant >> 1000/full or 100/half. So rejecting 1000/half as invalid is the only >> possible action. Preferably recommending "auto" for users who don't >> know what to do about the rejected config. No-one should ever force >> speed or duplex without knowing exactly what they do anyway. > > > NM does not normalize 1000/half... it just tries to set it but fails, > logging a warning that the set-link failed. Then the link configuration > will be just left as is, configuration is skipped. So, it will be the > device default, usually link autoconfiguration. > >> >> (And for those who know what they are doing, there is a 100% probability >> that the *correct* fix is to set the other end to "auto". Although I >> understand that not all users will have the ability to do that, due to >> the limited range of most cluebats) > > Please, note also that we don't support in NM changing the advertised > modes for link autoconfiguration: so, you have to let the device link > autoconf or you have to specify both speed & duplex. In this case, you > have to know what you are doing. > > After reading your notes, I started thinking to add the 1000/half check > in NM verify code, so it would prevent it from any client (nm-c-e > included)... > But then I saw the comment from poma... starting to add checks simple as > the 1000/half one, means starting taking care of right static values. > So, poma's request seems legitimate: just show available values, but as > Bjørn pointed out that's not that easy. > > So, I think the best option is to avoid any check on static values. > Users know they are alone when they set static link values. Full stop. > I had just added a note in the GUI tooltip stating this. > > Please, if you still want the 1000/half check tell, I could easily add > it to the GUI. > > Francesco >
Considering that there is no verification of static values, note the user to manually check. See https://git.gnome.org/browse/network-manager-applet/commit/?h=fg/c-e-ethernet-link2&id=7a07336 as a reference. --- libnm-core/nm-setting-wired.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/libnm-core/nm-setting-wired.c b/libnm-core/nm-setting-wired.c index 08b0b34..3d47cb6 100644 --- a/libnm-core/nm-setting-wired.c +++ b/libnm-core/nm-setting-wired.c @@ -1035,6 +1035,7 @@ nm_setting_wired_class_init (NMSettingWiredClass *setting_wired_class) * In that case, statically configures the device to use that specified speed. * In Mbit/s, ie 100 == 100Mbit/s. * Must be set together with the "duplex" property when non-zero. + * Before specifying a speed value be sure your device supports it. **/ /* ---ifcfg-rh--- * property: speed @@ -1057,6 +1058,7 @@ nm_setting_wired_class_init (NMSettingWiredClass *setting_wired_class) * Can be specified only when "auto-negotiate" is "off". In that case, statically * configures the device to use that specified duplex mode, either "half" or "full". * Must be set together with the "speed" property if specified. + * Before specifying a duplex mode be sure your device supports it. **/ /* ---ifcfg-rh--- * property: duplex -- 2.7.4 _______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
