From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: roopa Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] switchdev: fix stp update API to work with layered netdevices Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 08:47:15 -0700 Message-ID: <5506FB03.1010108@cumulusnetworks.com> References: <1426518099-3203-1-git-send-email-roopa@cumulusnetworks.com> <20150316154210.GC2058@nanopsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, sfeldma@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.220.43]:34198 "EHLO mail-pa0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932939AbbCPPrS (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:47:18 -0400 Received: by pacwe9 with SMTP id we9so68294762pac.1 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 08:47:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150316154210.GC2058@nanopsycho.orion> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/16/15, 8:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 04:01:39PM CET, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com wrote: >> From: Roopa Prabhu >> >> make it same as the netdev_switch_port_bridge_setlink/dellink >> api (ie traverse lowerdevs to get to the switch port). >> >> removes "WARN_ON(!ops->ndo_switch_parent_id_get)" because >> direct bridge ports can be stacked netdevices (like bonds >> and team of switch ports) which may not imeplement this ndo. >> >> v2 to v3: >> - remove changes to bond and team. Bring back the >> transparently following lowerdevs like i initially >> had for setlink/getlink >> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg313436.html) >> dave and scott feldman also seem to prefer it be that >> way and move to non-transparent way of doing things >> if we see a problem down the lane. >> >> Signed-off-by: Roopa Prabhu >> --- >> net/switchdev/switchdev.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c >> index c9bfa00..5c53951 100644 >> --- a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c >> +++ b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c >> @@ -47,11 +47,23 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(netdev_switch_parent_id_get); >> int netdev_switch_port_stp_update(struct net_device *dev, u8 state) >> { >> const struct swdev_ops *ops = dev->swdev_ops; >> + struct net_device *lower_dev; >> + struct list_head *iter; >> + int ret = 0, err = -EOPNOTSUPP; > No need to initialize err. ack, i wanted to initialize ret there actually. > >> - if (!ops || !ops->swdev_port_stp_update) >> - return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> - WARN_ON(!ops->swdev_parent_id_get); >> - return ops->swdev_port_stp_update(dev, state); >> + if (!(dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD)) >> + return ret; > Just flat "0" might be nicer here. > >> + >> + if (ops && ops->swdev_port_stp_update) >> + return ops->swdev_port_stp_update(dev, state); >> + >> + netdev_for_each_lower_dev(dev, lower_dev, iter) { >> + err = netdev_switch_port_stp_update(lower_dev, state); >> + if (err && err != -EOPNOTSUPP) >> + ret = err; >> + } >> + >> + return ret; > > Do we want to return 0 in case no lower dev is there? -EOPNOTSUPP seems > to make more sense to me in that case. yes, that was not intentional. I will fix the ret initialization like i intended and that should take care of it. thanks for the review.