Re: [PATCH 0/4] RFC CPSW switchdev mode

Ivan Vecera
2018-05-24T13:45:00Z

On 24.5.2018 14:54, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:48:31AM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:05:28AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Thu, May 24, 2018 at 08:56:20AM CEST, ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org wrote:
>>> Any reason you need cpu port? We don't need it in mlxsw and also in dsa.
>> Yes i've seen that on mlxsw/rocker drivers and i was reluctant adding one here.
>> The reason is that TI wants this configured differently from customer facing
>> ports. Apparently there are existing customers already using the "feature".
>> So OR'ing and adding the cpu port on every operation (add/del vlans add
>> ucast/mcast entries etc) was less favoured.
>
> Hi Ilias
>
> Nice to see this device moving away from its custom model and towards
> the switchdev model.
+1

> Did you consider making a clean break from the existing code and write
> a new driver. Let the existing customers using the existing
> driver. Have the new switchdev driver fully conform to switchdev.

I would also prefer fresh new driver. The existing one can be marked as
'bugfix-only' and later pertinently deprecated/removed.
>
> I don't like having this 'cpu' interface. As you say, it breaks the
> switchhdev model. If we need to extend the switchdev model to support
> some use case, lets do that. Please can you fully describe the use
> cases, so we can discuss how to implement them cleanly within the
> switchdev model.
+1

Ivan