From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Romieu Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] r8169: Don't claim WoL works if LanWake flag is not set Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 01:06:27 +0100 Message-ID: <20151211000627.GA3705@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> References: <1449655730-3328-1-git-send-email-vinschen@redhat.com> <1449657826-4461-1-git-send-email-vinschen@redhat.com> <20151209224306.GA5082@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <20151210095135.GA21583@calimero.vinschen.de> <20151210204054.GA30391@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <20151210220255.GB3507@calimero.vinschen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Realtek linux nic maintainers , Chun-Hao Lin , Hayes Wang To: Corinna Vinschen Return-path: Received: from violet.fr.zoreil.com ([92.243.8.30]:59187 "EHLO violet.fr.zoreil.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751143AbbLKAGj (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Dec 2015 19:06:39 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151210220255.GB3507@calimero.vinschen.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Corinna Vinschen : [...] > It's still a bit weird. On the machines I tested this on, if I disable > LanWake and shutdown the machine, I can send, e.g., MagicPackets as much > as I like, the machined don't come up. Isn't it a bit misleading then > if ethtool reports that some WoL method is enabled but it doesn't work? Of course it is. :o( I'm fine with Config5.LanWake changes if you have empirical evidences that it helps. We have terse - outdated ? - documentation and some hint from http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=137654699802446. I'm unable to figure what an/the adequate change could be, especially a low level chance of regression one. -- Ueimor