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  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:   Sun, 4 Oct 2020 17:45:22 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Jonathan McDowell <noodles@...th.li>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: propagate switchdev vlan_filtering
 prepare phase to drivers



On 10/4/2020 1:59 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 01:06:46AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> [...]
>> ---
>> The API for this one was chosen to be different than the one for
>> .port_vlan_add and .port_vlan_prepare because
>> (a) the list of dsa_switch_ops is growing bigger but in this case there
>>      is no justification for it. For example there are some drivers that
>>      don't do anything in .port_vlan_prepare, and likewise, they may not
>>      need to do anything in .port_vlan_filtering_prepare either
>> (b) the DSA API should be as close as possible to the switchdev API
>>      except when there's a strong reason for that not to be the case. In
>>      this situation, I don't see why it would be different.
> 
> I understand that this new function prototype is not to everyone's
> taste?

Just need more time to review, have not looked at it yet.
--
Florian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists