From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 349796119 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2023 06:41:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ej1-x633.google.com (mail-ej1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::633]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B862B198B for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 23:41:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x633.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-99bcd6c0282so811850366b.1 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 23:41:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=resnulli-us.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1690872070; x=1691476870; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uY84uby8p3w6eiPSff8BxRA/CDbixhIP2n+IcZbYoCU=; b=sOjowxp/wNDyEY7qja/6C3d7oVKInXgrfn/2Tq0xbDmTlj6F8eFD+0QgY/s9NgT7f5 Z0ipv1K6GHK/XD88NwrLmXTJQcp4iE8Qmi7Zv25c0TZwvex6Yvt4FdJcH7R09W1ZwZYo dqIZ3vjVFAygwfAqgitspF8wjDu9MEcrCgc1cSBrv2CKg/EwaENrdPOn3i4pxOBpzW+R KG2Jyij0A+Stef6pJ5vulBefi0vcjt1NggA5F5ssTFKu+puqxhEFcIJN1/KYKwBKXu+H g2i4QYym8bC7FXEuPJbPs6y7w+y4pQiHGaYlTnLPkSPMnFgnVth2R2Nv/dVO3rLchi5J FFkQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1690872070; x=1691476870; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=uY84uby8p3w6eiPSff8BxRA/CDbixhIP2n+IcZbYoCU=; b=hWyJY35cCw+lmUojXSkhB8UMhAvAAUtfzH7H6xl9rq8XVWEsnlRVMtg7zj+8luddgq YypXZn4vfGXYgd0I3Wmg8ZQKj8P4/ptaB1YqtNWUbax54VVOIoMCtTbelb2k07QTRuGA eBYNCO8FniBVYhg/9PUEU5p+cYVpHN6Y1b1af9wIVPGX4+ZWBvq3K6eXEhmw6Tnrg0Ol C7G9HGv7/3cX6S6/K+j2pdy/CSBBNwI1tMJlbFy8L3XRhZIbjWpWs01LMaaCPaP3HjOH aTLr4bxYcHN6Fc/wvOJundPLCbCWliIg4xykMifv1/71hTKLtgwMhgspPJJDFdK0+cDF SilA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABy/qLZe0rWW/oVCJn+aBJ6CdcutnqP+DwBmtbPKWW5Lxpwi8Xg5FOO/ 5nyPjSHpKnG3UH9iOC/0Rmsvcg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APBJJlGu447d+YszsKACauSuUqTOt2e8H8vzby8WYC222/wqTa5SrGtOqqsFqm1A2+AEazrwzsmJDg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:53d7:b0:992:345e:8319 with SMTP id p23-20020a17090653d700b00992345e8319mr1765320ejo.58.1690872069828; Mon, 31 Jul 2023 23:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([212.23.236.67]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k17-20020a1709061c1100b009937dbabbd5sm7156766ejg.220.2023.07.31.23.41.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 31 Jul 2023 23:41:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 08:41:08 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, moshe@nvidia.com, saeedm@nvidia.com, idosch@nvidia.com, petrm@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 08/11] devlink: introduce set of macros and use it for split ops definitions Message-ID: References: <20230720121829.566974-1-jiri@resnulli.us> <20230720121829.566974-9-jiri@resnulli.us> <20230725103816.2be372b2@kernel.org> <20230731095745.60a965b8@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230731095745.60a965b8@kernel.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 06:57:45PM CEST, kuba@kernel.org wrote: >On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 14:21:52 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >If you want to use split ops extensively please use the nlspec >> >and generate the table automatically. Integrating closer with >> >the spec will have many benefits. >> >> Yeah, I was thinging about it, it just didn't seem necessary. Okay, will >> check that out. >> >> Btw, does that mean that any split-ops usage would require generated >> code? If yes, could you please document that somewhere, probably near >> the struct? > >I wrote it somewhere, probably the commit messages for the split ops. I believe we need to have it written down in actual codebase. >The tools are not 100% ready for partial generation I don't want to >force everyone to do code gen. But the homegrown macros in every family >are a no go. So you say that if I spell it out without macros, that would be okay?