Re: [PATCH V2 mlx5-next 01/10] net/core: Introduce master_xmit_slave_get

Jiri Pirko
2020-04-21T05:37:49Z

Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 09:02:58PM CEST, dsahern@gmail.com wrote:
>On 4/20/20 12:56 PM, Maor Gottlieb wrote:
>>
>> On 4/20/2020 9:48 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 08:04:01PM CEST, dsahern@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On 4/20/20 12:01 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>>> Generic ndo with lag-specific arg? Odd. Plus, there is a small chance
>>>>> this is ever going to be used for other master. And if so, could be
>>>>> very
>>>>> easily renamed then...
>>>> core code should be generic, not specific and renamed at a later date
>>>> when a second use case arises.
>>> Yeah, I guess we just have to agree to disagree :)
>>
>> So I am remaining with the flags. Any suggestion for better name for the
>> enum? Should I move master_xmit_get_slave from lag.h to netdevice.h?
>>>
>
>IMHO, yes, that is a better place.
>
>generic ndo name and implementation.
>type specific flag as needed.
>
>This is consistent with net_device and ndo - both generic concepts -
>with specifics relegated to flags (e.g., IFF_*)

Why there is need for flags? Why a single bool can't do as I suggested?
Do you see any usecase for another flag?