[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46f77bb5-c26e-70b9-0f5a-cd3327171960@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:02:58 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Maor Gottlieb <maorg@...lanox.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, jgg@...lanox.com, dledford@...hat.com,
j.vosburgh@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
kuba@...nel.org, leonro@...lanox.com, saeedm@...lanox.com,
jiri@...lanox.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, alexr@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 mlx5-next 01/10] net/core: Introduce
master_xmit_slave_get
On 4/20/20 12:56 PM, Maor Gottlieb wrote:
>
> On 4/20/2020 9:48 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 08:04:01PM CEST, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>>> On 4/20/20 12:01 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>> Generic ndo with lag-specific arg? Odd. Plus, there is a small chance
>>>> this is ever going to be used for other master. And if so, could be
>>>> very
>>>> easily renamed then...
>>> core code should be generic, not specific and renamed at a later date
>>> when a second use case arises.
>> Yeah, I guess we just have to agree to disagree :)
>
> So I am remaining with the flags. Any suggestion for better name for the
> enum? Should I move master_xmit_get_slave from lag.h to netdevice.h?
>>
IMHO, yes, that is a better place.
generic ndo name and implementation.
type specific flag as needed.
This is consistent with net_device and ndo - both generic concepts -
with specifics relegated to flags (e.g., IFF_*)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists