Re: [net-next RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: qca8k: code split for qca8k

From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: qca8k: code split for qca8k
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 20:02:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <62d5a454.1c69fb81.18bd7.3d97@mx.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220718181559.lzzrrutmr2b7mpsn@skbuf>

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 09:15:59PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 07:23:35PM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > Ok, so I have to keep the qca8k special function. Is it a problem if I
> > keep the function and than later make the conversion when we have the
> > regmap dependency merged?
> 
> You mean to ask whether there's any problem if the common qca8k_fdb_read()
> calls the specific qca8k_bulk_read as opposed to regmap_bulk_read()?
> 
> Well, no, considering that you don't yet support the switch with the
> MMIO regmap, the common code is still "common" for the single switch
> that the driver supports. You should be able to continue making progress
> with qca8k_bulk_read() being called from common code (as long as you
> leave a TODO comment or something, that it doesn't really belong there).

Ok I will leave a TODO comment and switch to the new implemenation when
the regmap implementation will be available. Thanks for the
clarification on how to proceed.

-- 
	Ansuel