From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 A3448262AB for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 13:34:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F5BDC433C8; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 13:34:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1696340049; bh=YgpznB6UVwDAk8kZkqvYggW8dN/E0S+mAdS++LtlF0Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=cCwNRSLhR7ueBItEphJhcR6bYjpJmtiCtyuUcsw6+oL1oQvvtP6muvlQ8XBNEK6OF Aa+SEEiKKBzyKSZf3pMJoPsBo7DGy6gdpJbMpKTUwHCGReYzO+4Na8lITqKDfQFOT0 oXnDX6nHmYIzfHEHEGnyeN/dDJU8PLv1RhxaZPnqWfaSayPgn3j9WT5XIqzKaYUuIG ThoCB8ccZYGcN/mcPyrWRz4jpRI1PsOiy0JUVos0tU9h/lDeG9TV+TAdOT4SQcly4h ZT6HAeUSjxub4ybVMDGyrHCEHgzmUmQAzmDMA8PzfdI4l9MfloMn5GHY9PYLQj6KYy TQbJh3AJiODaw== Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 06:34:01 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: Lukasz Majewski , Tristram.Ha@microchip.com, Eric Dumazet , Andrew Lunn , davem@davemloft.net, Woojung Huh , Oleksij Rempel , Florian Fainelli , Paolo Abeni , UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Oleksij Rempel , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [[RFC PATCH v4 net-next] 0/2] net: dsa: hsr: Enable HSR HW offloading for KSZ9477 Message-ID: <20231003063401.5fc0ffb9@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20230911170222.hip2pcyzbfu3olau@skbuf> References: <20230906152801.921664-1-lukma@denx.de> <20230911165848.0741c03c@wsk> <20230911160501.5vc4nttz6fnww56h@skbuf> <20230911170222.hip2pcyzbfu3olau@skbuf> 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:02:22 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote: > Hi @Jakub, I remember you fixed some issues with the dev->dev_addr writes, > after dev_addr_lists.c was changed to a rbtree. Is it easy for you to > tell if the change below is safe from an API perspective? > > Is the answer "yes, because dev_uc_add() uses an addr_type of NETDEV_HW_ADDR_T_UNICAST, > and dev->dev_addr uses NETDEV_HW_ADDR_T_LAN, so they never share a struct netdev_hw_addr > for the same MAC address, and thus, they never collide"? > > The DSA and 8021q drivers currently have this pattern, from around 2008. > But 8021q also tracks NETDEV_CHANGEADDR events on the real_dev, which is > absent in DSA. If the change below is safe, it would be a simpler solution. FWIW I think it should be fine from the rbtree perspective, but IDK how the user space would react to having a duplicate lladdr.