netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 12/14] net: dsa: Wire up multicast IGMP snooping attribute notification

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 11:07:40 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net,
        idosch@...lanox.com, jiri@...lanox.com,
        ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org, ivan.khoronzhuk@...aro.org,
        roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 12/14] net: dsa: Wire up multicast IGMP snooping
 attribute notification

On 1/17/19 10:36 AM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 12:01:00 -0800, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
> 
>> +	int	(*port_multicast_toggle)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>> +					 bool mc_disabled);
>  
> Waw this looks counter-intuitive and error-prone... Would you prefer to make it
> symmetrical to ops->port_vlan_filtering() by implementing ops->port_multicast()
> and passing !obj->u.mc_disabled to it?

I debated doing that, but I think it is better to have the same boolean
polarity from end to end, even if it is highly counter intuitive as you
said. That is kind of the story of bridge attributes annyway, completely
counter intuitive.
-- 
Florian