Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:02:03 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To:     "Allan W. Nielsen" <allan.nielsen@microchip.com>
Cc:     Henrik Bjoernlund <henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com>,
        davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, roopa@nvidia.com,
        nikolay@nvidia.com, jiri@mellanox.com, idosch@mellanox.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com,
        Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next v2 10/11] bridge: switchdev: cfm: switchdev interface
 implementation
Message-ID: <20201006090203.GA3336@nanopsycho>
References: <20201001103019.1342470-1-henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com>
 <20201001103019.1342470-11-henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com>
 <20201001124929.GM8264@nanopsycho>
 <20201005130712.ybbgiddb7bnbkz6h@ws.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201005130712.ybbgiddb7bnbkz6h@ws.localdomain>
Precedence: bulk

Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 03:07:12PM CEST, allan.nielsen@microchip.com wrote:
>Hi Jiri
>
>On 01.10.2020 14:49, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>> 
>> Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 12:30:18PM CEST, henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com wrote:
>> > This is the definition of the CFM switchdev interface.
>> > 
>> > The interface consist of these objects:
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_CFM,
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_CONFIG_CFM,
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_CONFIG_CFM,
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_PEER_MEP_CFM,
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_CCM_TX_CFM,
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_STATUS_CFM,
>> >    SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PEER_MEP_STATUS_CFM
>> > 
>> > MEP instance add/del
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_add(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_CFM)
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_del(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_CFM)
>> > 
>> > MEP cofigure
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_add(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_CONFIG_CFM)
>> > 
>> > MEP CC cofigure
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_add(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_CONFIG_CFM)
>> > 
>> > Peer MEP add/del
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_add(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_PEER_MEP_CFM)
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_del(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_PEER_MEP_CFM)
>> > 
>> > Start/stop CCM transmission
>> >    switchdev_port_obj_add(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_CC_CCM_TX_CFM)
>> > 
>> > Get MEP status
>> >       switchdev_port_obj_get(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_MEP_STATUS_CFM)
>> > 
>> > Get Peer MEP status
>> >       switchdev_port_obj_get(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PEER_MEP_STATUS_CFM)
>> > 
>> > Reviewed-by: Horatiu Vultur  <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Henrik Bjoernlund  <henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com>
>> 
>> You have to submit the driver parts as a part of this patchset.
>> Otherwise it is no good.
>Fair enough.
>
>With MRP we did it like this, and after Nik asked for details on what is
>being offload, we thought that adding this would help.
>
>The reason why we did not include the implementation of this interface
>is that it is for a new SoC which is still not fully available which is
>why we have not done the basic SwitchDev driver for it yet. But the
>basic functionality clearly needs to come first.
>
>Our preference is to continue fixing the comments we got on the pure SW
>implementation and then get back to the SwitchDev offloading.
>
>This will mean dropping the last 2 patches in the serie.
>
>Does that work for you Jiri, and Nik?

Sure.

>
>/Allan
>