Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 21 Oct 2019 11:44:33 -0400
Message-ID: <20191021114433.GB6522@t480s.localdomain>
From:   Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/16] net: dsa: use dsa_to_port helper
 everywhere
In-Reply-To: <20191021123149.GB16084@lunn.ch>
References: <20191020031941.3805884-1-vivien.didelot@gmail.com>
 <20191020031941.3805884-2-vivien.didelot@gmail.com>
 <20191021123149.GB16084@lunn.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Andrew,

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:31:49 +0200, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 11:19:26PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> > Do not let the drivers access the ds->ports static array directly
> > while there is a dsa_to_port helper for this purpose.
> > 
> > At the same time, un-const this helper since the SJA1105 driver
> > assigns the priv member of the returned dsa_port structure.
> 
> Hi Vivien
> 
> Is priv the only member we expect drivers to change? Is the rest
> private to the core/RO? Rather then remove the const, i wonder if it
> would be better to add a helper to set priv?
> 
> Otherwise:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>

I had the same thought but actually since the SJA1105 driver is the only
user, I was thinking about maybe getting rid of it, I don't really see the
point of having some "dp->priv = priv, priv->dp = dp" kind of code...

In the meantime I kept the eventual helper or priv removal for a future series.


Thank you,
Vivien