On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 14:17 -0700, Darren.Reed at Sun.COM wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems wrote:
>
> >...
> >Solution
> >--------
> >
> >We propose to add two macros to sys/ethernet.h:
> >
> > #define ETHERVTAGL 4 /* size of a VLAN tag */
> > #define ETHERVLANMAX 1518 /* max tagged ethernet frame size */
> >
> >Some existing macros that we tried to follow the naming style of:
> >
> > ETHERADDRL
> > ETHERFCSL
> > ETHERMAX
> >
> >We're not sure that the contents of sys/ethernet.h have ever been covered by
> >an
> >ARC case, but we believe that these two macros could be added to the DDI and
> >given either Committed or Uncommitted binding so that 3rd party drivers could
> >begin using them.
> >
> >
>
> Are you actually proposing that the above be committed/uncommitted?
>
> Or to ask this another way, is there any reason why these macros
> should not be published as being at least "uncommitted"?
I am proposing just that. Right now, I'm not sure they are covered by
any ARC cases whatsoever.
-- Garrett
>
> Darren
>
