From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: roopa Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4] switchdev: fix stp update API to work with layered netdevices Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 05:42:23 -0700 Message-ID: <5508212F.9090006@cumulusnetworks.com> References: <1426527159-8039-1-git-send-email-roopa@cumulusnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , =?UTF-8?B?SmnFmcOtIFDDrXJrbw==?= , Netdev To: Scott Feldman Return-path: Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com ([209.85.192.177]:33931 "EHLO mail-pd0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752206AbbCQMmY (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 08:42:24 -0400 Received: by pdbni2 with SMTP id ni2so8800167pdb.1 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 05:42:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/16/15, 11:10 PM, Scott Feldman wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, wrote: >> From: Roopa Prabhu >> >> make it same as the netdev_switch_port_bridge_setlink/dellink >> api (ie traverse lowerdevs to get to the switch port). >> >> removes "WARN_ON(!ops->ndo_switch_parent_id_get)" because >> direct bridge ports can be stacked netdevices (like bonds >> and team of switch ports) which may not imeplement this ndo. >> >> v2 to v3: >> - remove changes to bond and team. Bring back the >> transparently following lowerdevs like i initially >> had for setlink/getlink >> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg313436.html) >> dave and scott feldman also seem to prefer it be that >> way and move to non-transparent way of doing things >> if we see a problem down the lane. >> >> v3 to v4: >> - fix ret initialization >> >> Signed-off-by: Roopa Prabhu >> --- >> net/switchdev/switchdev.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c >> index c9bfa00..e593b59 100644 >> --- a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c >> +++ b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c >> @@ -47,11 +47,23 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(netdev_switch_parent_id_get); >> int netdev_switch_port_stp_update(struct net_device *dev, u8 state) >> { >> const struct swdev_ops *ops = dev->swdev_ops; >> + struct net_device *lower_dev; >> + struct list_head *iter; >> + int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP, err; >> >> - if (!ops || !ops->swdev_port_stp_update) >> - return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> - WARN_ON(!ops->swdev_parent_id_get); >> - return ops->swdev_port_stp_update(dev, state); >> + if (!(dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD)) >> + return ret; > I would drop the NETIF_F_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD check. It's not telling > you anything more than the next test for ops->swdev_port_stp_update. This was mainly to avoid lowerdev walk where you know that the dev does not have the feature. example: the bond carries this feature flag if any of its slaves have it. The lowerdev walk can be stopped at the bond. I don't mind removing the check, if you prefer that. thanks, Roopa