[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191021160004.GD90634@t480s.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 16:00:04 -0400
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/16] net: dsa: add ports list in the switch
fabric
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:37:40 +0200, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> > +static struct dsa_port *dsa_port_touch(struct dsa_switch *ds, int index)
> > +{
> > + struct dsa_switch_tree *dst = ds->dst;
> > + struct dsa_port *dp;
> > +
> > + dp = &ds->ports[index];
> > +
> > + dp->ds = ds;
> > + dp->index = index;
> > +
> > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dp->list);
> > + list_add(&dp->list, &dst->ports);
> > +
> > + return dp;
> > +}
>
> Bike shedding, but i don't particularly like the name touch. How
> about list. The opposite would then be delist, if we ever need it?
The fabric code uses "touch" for "get or create" already, so I used the same
semantics for ports as well. But I'm not strongly attached to this naming
anyway, so I will polish them all together in a future series.
Thanks,
Vivien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists