Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: implementation of dynamic ATU entries

From: Hans Schultz <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 22:14:55 +0100

On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 17:02, Simon Horman <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> Just to clarify my suggestion one last time, it would be along the lines
> of the following (completely untested!). I feel that it robustly covers
> all cases for fdb_flags. And as a bonus doesn't need to be modified
> if other (unsupported) flags are added in future.
>
> 	if (fdb_flags & ~(DSA_FDB_FLAG_DYNAMIC))
> 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> 	is_dynamic = !!(fdb_flags & DSA_FDB_FLAG_DYNAMIC)
> 	if (is_dynamic)
> 		state = MV88E6XXX_G1_ATU_DATA_STATE_UC_AGE_7_NEWEST;
>
>
> And perhaps for other drivers:
>
> 	if (fdb_flags & ~(DSA_FDB_FLAG_DYNAMIC))
> 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 	if (fdb_flags)
> 		return 0;
>
> Perhaps a helper would be warranted for the above.

How would such a helper look? Inline function is not clean.

>
> But in writing this I think that, perhaps drivers could return -EOPNOTSUPP
> for the DSA_FDB_FLAG_DYNAMIC case and the caller can handle, rather tha
> propagate, -EOPNOTSUPP.

I looked at that, but changing the caller is also a bit ugly.

>
> Returning -EOPNOTSUPP is the normal way to drivers to respond to requests
> for unsupported hardware offloads. Sticking to that may be clearner
> in the long run. That said, I do agree your current patch is correct
> given the flag that is defined (by your patchset).