netdev - Re: [net-next 01/15] net/mlx5: Lag, Let user configure multiport eswitch

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]

Message-ID: <b8dbd338-e2d0-5173-3186-4f92d7d52f40@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:04:16 +0100
From:   Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC:     Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Roi Dayan <roid@...dia.com>,
        Maor Dickman <maord@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 01/15] net/mlx5: Lag, Let user configure multiport
 eswitch

From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 13:46:29 +0200

> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 06:07:54PM +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>> From: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
>> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 14:18:07 -0800

[...]

>>> @@ -437,6 +438,55 @@ static int mlx5_devlink_large_group_num_validate(struct devlink *devlink, u32 id
>>>  	return 0;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static int mlx5_devlink_esw_multiport_set(struct devlink *devlink, u32 id,
>>> +					  struct devlink_param_gset_ctx *ctx)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct mlx5_core_dev *dev = devlink_priv(devlink);
>>> +	int err = 0;
>>> +
>>> +	if (!MLX5_ESWITCH_MANAGER(dev))
>>> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> +
>>> +	if (ctx->val.vbool)
>>> +		err = mlx5_lag_mpesw_enable(dev);
>>> +	else
>>> +		mlx5_lag_mpesw_disable(dev);
>>> +
>>> +	return err;
>>
>> How about
>>
>> 	if (ctx->val.vbool)
>> 		return mlx5_lag_mpesw_enable(dev);
>> 	else
>> 		mlx5_lag_mpesw_disable(dev);
>>
>> 	return 0;
> 
> If such construction is used, there won't need in "else".
> 
>  	if (ctx->val.vbool)
>  		return mlx5_lag_mpesw_enable(dev);
> 
>  	mlx5_lag_mpesw_disable(dev);
>  	return 0;

Correct, I just thought that if-else would look more intuitive here
since it's a simple "if enabled enable else disable".

[...]

Thanks,
Olek