[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 19:12:15 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc: andrew@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, roopa@...dia.com,
nikolay@...dia.com, jiri@...nulli.us, idosch@...sch.org,
stephen@...workplumber.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 6/9] net: dsa: Forward offloading
On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 11:01:09AM +0200, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 02:04, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:12:15AM +0200, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> >> > and you create a dependency between the tagger and the switch driver
> >> > which was supposed by design to not exist.
> >>
> >> Sure, but _why_ should it not exist? Many fields in the tag can only be
> >> correctly generated/interpreted in combination with knowledge of the
> >> current configuration, which is the driver's domain. The dependency is
> >> already there, etched in silicon.
> >
> > I'm a bit more of a pragmatic person,
>
> Excuse me sir, I believe you left your dagger IN MY HEART :)
You might have misinterpreted my words, I did not mean to say "look what
a good quality I have and you don't", in fact I don't view pragmatism as
much of a desirable quality at all. What I meant to say in the context
is that, even though in general I value functionality more than how it
is implemented, I would still like to keep the separation between
taggers and switch drivers at least at the most basic RX/TX level, for
the reasons explained.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists