[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150806141934.GA20660@ketchup.touchtunes.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 10:19:34 -0400
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel <kernel@...oirfairelinux.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/7] net: switchdev: support static FDB
addresses
On 15-08-05 23:28:15, Scott Feldman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Vivien Didelot
> <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com> wrote:
> > This patch adds a is_static boolean to the switchdev_obj_fdb structure,
> > in order to set the ndm_state to either NUD_NOARP or NUD_REACHABLE.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
> > ---
> > include/net/switchdev.h | 1 +
> > net/switchdev/switchdev.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/net/switchdev.h b/include/net/switchdev.h
> > index e90e1a0..0e296b8 100644
> > --- a/include/net/switchdev.h
> > +++ b/include/net/switchdev.h
> > @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ struct switchdev_obj {
> > struct switchdev_obj_fdb { /* PORT_FDB */
> > u8 addr[ETH_ALEN];
> > u16 vid;
> > + bool is_static;
>
> What do you think about changing this to u16 ndm_state? That way, it
> can be used on input (fdb add) and output (fdb dump), and the driver
> can privately track the state, kind of like how the bridge keeps
> is_static, is_local, etc.
I'm OK with the change. Should we consider NUD_NONE (0) a valid value?
> > } fdb;
> > } u;
> > };
> > diff --git a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c
> > index 9db87a3..e9d1cac 100644
> > --- a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c
> > +++ b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c
> > @@ -811,7 +811,7 @@ static int switchdev_port_fdb_dump_cb(struct net_device *dev,
> > ndm->ndm_flags = NTF_SELF;
> > ndm->ndm_type = 0;
> > ndm->ndm_ifindex = dev->ifindex;
> > - ndm->ndm_state = NUD_REACHABLE;
> > + ndm->ndm_state = obj->u.fdb.is_static ? NUD_NOARP : NUD_REACHABLE;
In other word, do we prefer this:
ndm->ndm_state = obj->u.fdb.ndm_state == NUD_NONE ?
NUD_REACHABLE : obj->u.fdb.ndm_state;
Or this (meaning switchdev users cannot leave it blank and must at least
set NUD_REACHABLE themselves):
ndm->ndm_state = obj->u.fdb.ndm_state;
Thanks,
-v
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists