From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:52956 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751891AbeCXQEx (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Sat, 24 Mar 2018 12:04:53 -0400
Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id l9so8475294wmh.2
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 09:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 17:04:50 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, idosch@mellanox.com,
        jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, mlxsw@mellanox.com,
        vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
        michael.chan@broadcom.com, ganeshgr@chelsio.com,
        saeedm@mellanox.com, simon.horman@netronome.com,
        pieter.jansenvanvuuren@netronome.com, john.hurley@netronome.com,
        dirk.vandermerwe@netronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@intel.com,
        ogerlitz@mellanox.com, dsahern@gmail.com, vijaya.guvva@cavium.com,
        satananda.burla@cavium.com, raghu.vatsavayi@cavium.com,
        felix.manlunas@cavium.com, gospo@broadcom.com,
        sathya.perla@broadcom.com, vasundhara-v.volam@broadcom.com,
        tariqt@mellanox.com, eranbe@mellanox.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 00/12] devlink: introduce port flavours and
 common phys_port_name generation
Message-ID: <20180324160450.GF1891@nanopsycho>
References: <20180322105522.8186-1-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <20180323134357.GG5145@lunn.ch>
 <20180323145935.GC2125@nanopsycho>
 <20180323152412.GC24361@lunn.ch>
 <20180324074551.GD1891@nanopsycho>
 <20180324144002.GA31941@lunn.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180324144002.GA31941@lunn.ch>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 03:40:02PM CET, andrew@lunn.ch wrote:
>> >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.

In mlxsw, driver queries the FW to get this info.