[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a8b08bf9-2f45-8816-4056-2da42d4d9e24@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 13:36:25 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: Wrap ndo_do_ioctl() to prepare for DSA
stacked ops
On 7/18/2020 1:30 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 08:05:30PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> In preparation for adding another layer of call into a DSA stacked ops
>> singleton, wrap the ndo_do_ioctl() call into dev_do_ioctl().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
>> ---
>
> I missed most of the context, but this looks interesting. Am I correct
> in saying that this could save us from having to manually pass
> phy_mii_ioctl() and that it could be generically handled here?
The motivation for this work started with the realization while
untangling the ethtool/netlink and PHY library that tests like those:
dev->netdev_ops == &foo_ops would be defeated by the way DSA overloads
the DSA net_device operations. A better solution needed to be found.
You are correct that we could just put a call to phy_mii_ioctl() here as
well and avoid having drivers have to use phy_do_ioctl_running or roll
their own.
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists