Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2023 11:33:58 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     netdev@kapio-technology.com
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@linutronix.de>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@microchip.com>,
        "maintainer:MICROCHIP KSZ SERIES ETHERNET SWITCH DRIVER" 
        <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>, Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@mediatek.com>,
        DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        =?utf-8?B?Q2zDqW1lbnQgTMOpZ2Vy?= <clement.leger@bootlin.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@nvidia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
        "open list:RENESAS RZ/N1 A5PSW SWITCH DRIVER" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" <bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to
 switchdev notifier
Message-ID: <20230119093358.gbyka2x4qbxxr43b@skbuf>
References: <20230117185714.3058453-1-netdev@kapio-technology.com>
 <20230117185714.3058453-2-netdev@kapio-technology.com>
 <20230117230806.ipwcbnq4jcc4qs7z@skbuf>
 <a3bba3eb856a00b5e5e0c1e2ffe8749a@kapio-technology.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a3bba3eb856a00b5e5e0c1e2ffe8749a@kapio-technology.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:14:00PM +0100, netdev@kapio-technology.com wrote:
> > > +	item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags);
> > 
> > Why reverse logic? Why not just name this "is_static" and leave any
> > further interpretations up to the consumer?
> 
> My reasoning for this is that the common case is to have static entries,
> thus is_dyn=false, so whenever someone uses a switchdev_notifier_fdb_info
> struct the common case does not need to be entered.
> Otherwise it might also break something when someone uses this struct and if
> it was 'is_static' and they forget to code is_static=true they will get
> dynamic entries without wanting it and it can be hard to find such an error.

I'll leave it up to bridge maintainers if this is preferable to patching
all callers of SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE such that they set is_static=true.