Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 00/12] devlink: introduce port flavours and common phys_port_name generation

From: Andrew Lunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:40:02 +0100

> >The hardware and mechanical engineer is free to wire switch ports to
> >the front panel however they want. That is why we put the netdev name
> >in device tree.
> 
> Got it. Hmm, so I think that the port number can be made optional and
> when it is present, it would be used to generate phys_port_name. If
> not, perhaps devlink port index could be used instead.
> 
> So iiuc, you don't really need phys_port_name in dsa, as it provides
> misleading names, right? Why is it implemented then?

Hi Jiri

Isn't the same true for all devices? It is not just DSA devices where
the hardware engineer is free to wire up the front panel however they
want, it can happen for any device.

      Andrew