From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/6] net: dsa: remove trans argument from mdb ops
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2017 10:06:49 -0500
Message-ID: <87mv3vqynq.fsf@weeman.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
References: <20171108171917.5965-1-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <20171108171917.5965-2-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <01a09219-c348-5aa5-c052-c8ea505c769d@egil-hjelmeland.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@savoirfairelinux.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: Egil Hjelmeland <privat@egil-hjelmeland.no>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <01a09219-c348-5aa5-c052-c8ea505c769d@egil-hjelmeland.no>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

Hi Egil,

Egil Hjelmeland <privat@egil-hjelmeland.no> writes:

> On 08. nov. 2017 18:19, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>> The DSA switch MDB ops pass the switchdev_trans structure down to the
>> drivers, but no one is using them and they aren't supposed to anyway.
>> 
>> Remove the trans argument from MDB prepare and add operations.
>> 
>> -	int	(*port_mdb_prepare)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>> -				    const struct switchdev_obj_port_mdb *mdb,
>> -				    struct switchdev_trans *trans);
>> -	void	(*port_mdb_add)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>> -				const struct switchdev_obj_port_mdb *mdb,
>> -				struct switchdev_trans *trans);
>> +	int (*port_mdb_prepare)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>> +				const struct switchdev_obj_port_mdb *mdb);
>> +	void (*port_mdb_add)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>> +			     const struct switchdev_obj_port_mdb *mdb);
>>   	int	(*port_mdb_del)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>>   				const struct switchdev_obj_port_mdb *mdb);
>
> Hi Vivien
> Nice to get rid of "trans". I recall I was confused by this parameter. 
> "Am I supposed to do something with this parameter?".
>
> But when at it. What about getting rid of switchdev_obj_port_mdb, making 
> similar signatures as the new .port_fdb_xxx functions? Would that make 
> sense?

There is definitely something to do to factorize FDB and MDB operations,
since an Ethernet switch driver will only manipulate an address database
in the end. I have something in mind but this is out-of-scope ATM.

Thanks,

        Vivien