From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] net: bridge: Extract boilerplate around switchdev_port_obj_*()
Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 19:56:10 +0300
Message-ID: <wih4livhdxx.fsf@dev-r-vrt-156.mtr.labs.mlnx>
References: <cover.1527173527.git.petrm@mellanox.com>
        <af1bed5ce2b236544edd591b8cfb8425c2cb5ca0.1527173527.git.petrm@mellanox.com>
        <87d0xjzpf2.fsf@weeman.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
        <bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org>, <jiri@mellanox.com>,
        <idosch@mellanox.com>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
        <razvan.stefanescu@nxp.com>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        <stephen@networkplumber.org>, <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        <f.fainelli@gmail.com>, <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com>
To: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-he1eur01on0119.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.0.119]:45342
        "EHLO EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S933631AbeEYQ4f (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 25 May 2018 12:56:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87d0xjzpf2.fsf@weeman.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
        (Vivien Didelot's message of "Fri, 25 May 2018 12:10:57 -0400")
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> writes:

> Hi Petr,
>
> Petr Machata <petrm@mellanox.com> writes:
>
>> -static int __vlan_vid_add(struct net_device *dev, struct net_bridge *br,
>> -			  u16 vid, u16 flags)
>> +static int br_switchdev_port_obj_add(struct net_device *dev, u16 vid, u16 flags)
>>  {
>>  	struct switchdev_obj_port_vlan v = {
>>  		.obj.orig_dev = dev,
>> @@ -89,12 +88,29 @@ static int __vlan_vid_add(struct net_device *dev, struct net_bridge *br,
>>  		.vid_begin = vid,
>>  		.vid_end = vid,
>>  	};
>> -	int err;
>>  
>> +	return switchdev_port_obj_add(dev, &v.obj);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int br_switchdev_port_obj_del(struct net_device *dev, u16 vid)
>> +{
>> +	struct switchdev_obj_port_vlan v = {
>> +		.obj.orig_dev = dev,
>> +		.obj.id = SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_VLAN,
>> +		.vid_begin = vid,
>> +		.vid_end = vid,
>> +	};
>> +
>> +	return switchdev_port_obj_del(dev, &v.obj);
>> +}
>
> Shouldn't they be br_switchdev_port_vlan_add (or similar) implemented in
> net/bridge/br_switchdev.c instead, since they are VLAN specific?

(You mean switchdev-specific?)

This logic was in br_vlan.c before as well, so it's natural to think
about the functions as helpers of VLAN module. I can move to
br_switchdev.c if you think that's the better place.

Thanks,
Petr