Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: provide shim definition for br_vlan_flags

[Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 10:28:12PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> On 27/10/2021 19:21, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > br_vlan_replay() needs this, and we're preparing to move it to
> > br_switchdev.c, which will be compiled regardless of whether or not
> > CONFIG_BRIDGE_VLAN_FILTERING is enabled.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
> > ---
> >  net/bridge/br_private.h | 5 +++++
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_private.h b/net/bridge/br_private.h
> > index 3c9327628060..cc31c3fe1e02 100644
> > --- a/net/bridge/br_private.h
> > +++ b/net/bridge/br_private.h
> > @@ -1708,6 +1708,11 @@ static inline bool br_vlan_can_enter_range(const struct net_bridge_vlan *v_curr,
> >  	return true;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static inline u16 br_vlan_flags(const struct net_bridge_vlan *v, u16 pvid)
> > +{
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static inline int br_vlan_replay(struct net_device *br_dev,
> >  				 struct net_device *dev, const void *ctx,
> >  				 bool adding, struct notifier_block *nb,
> > 
> 
> hm, shouldn't the vlan replay be a shim if bridge vlans are not defined?
> I.e. shouldn't this rather be turned into br_vlan_replay's shim?
> 
> TBH, I haven't looked into the details just wonder why we would compile all that vlan
> code if bridge vlan filtering is not enabled.

The main reason is that I would like to avoid #ifdef if possible. If you
have a strong opinion otherwise I can follow suit.