[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230329201029.0fff8d9d@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:10:29 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Yinjun Zhang <yinjun.zhang@...igine.com>
Cc: Louis Peens <louis.peens@...igine.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
oss-drivers <oss-drivers@...igine.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] nfp: initialize netdev's dev_port with
correct id
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 02:52:22 +0000 Yinjun Zhang wrote:
> > Yes, but phys_port_name is still there, and can be used, right?
> > So why add another attr?
>
> Yes, phys_port_name is still there. But some users prefer to use dev_port.
> I don't add this new attr, it's already existed since
> 3f85944fe207 ("net: Add sysfs file for port number").
> I just make the attr's value correct.
You're using a different ID than phys_port_name, as far as I can tell :(
When the port is not split will id == label, always?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists