Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF41C636D6 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 18:41:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233519AbjBCSlZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:41:25 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34084 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231495AbjBCSlX (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:41:23 -0500 Received: from mailout-taastrup.gigahost.dk (mailout-taastrup.gigahost.dk [46.183.139.199]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 721071ADDD; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 10:41:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout.gigahost.dk (mailout.gigahost.dk [89.186.169.112]) by mailout-taastrup.gigahost.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C21D1883921; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 18:41:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gigahost.dk (smtp.gigahost.dk [89.186.169.109]) by mailout.gigahost.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78969250007B; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 18:41:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.gigahost.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5F8CC91201E4; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 18:41:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Screener-Id: 413d8c6ce5bf6eab4824d0abaab02863e8e3f662 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2023 19:41:18 +0100 From: netdev@kapio-technology.com To: Simon Horman Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Florian Fainelli , Andrew Lunn , Vladimir Oltean , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Kurt Kanzenbach , Hauke Mehrtens , Woojung Huh , "maintainer:MICROCHIP KSZ SERIES ETHERNET SWITCH DRIVER" , Sean Wang , Landen Chao , DENG Qingfang , Matthias Brugger , Claudiu Manoil , Alexandre Belloni , =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9m?= =?UTF-8?Q?ent_L=C3=A9ger?= , Jiri Pirko , Ivan Vecera , Roopa Prabhu , Nikolay Aleksandrov , Russell King , Christian Marangi , open list , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , "open list:RENESAS RZ/N1 A5PSW SWITCH DRIVER" , "moderated list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] drivers: net: dsa: add fdb entry flags incoming to switchcore drivers In-Reply-To: References: <20230130173429.3577450-1-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <20230130173429.3577450-4-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <0b021777dfc1825b6565c0d9dbd6dbef@kapio-technology.com> User-Agent: Gigahost Webmail Message-ID: <687a1918326d23ec901c1f53f5860592@kapio-technology.com> X-Sender: netdev@kapio-technology.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2023-02-03 09:17, Simon Horman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 05:45:56PM +0100, netdev@kapio-technology.com > wrote: >> On 2023-01-31 19:54, Simon Horman wrote: >> > > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/b53/b53_common.c >> > > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/b53/b53_common.c >> > > @@ -1684,11 +1684,15 @@ static int b53_arl_op(struct b53_device >> > > *dev, int op, int port, >> > > >> > > int b53_fdb_add(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, >> > > const unsigned char *addr, u16 vid, >> > > - struct dsa_db db) >> > > + u16 fdb_flags, struct dsa_db db) >> > > { >> > > struct b53_device *priv = ds->priv; >> > > int ret; >> > > >> > > + /* Ignore entries with set flags */ >> > > + if (fdb_flags) >> > > + return 0; >> > >> > >> > Would returning -EOPNOTSUPP be more appropriate? >> > >> > ... >> >> I don't think that would be so good, as the command >> >> bridge fdb replace ADDR dev master dynamic >> >> is a valid command and should not generate errors. When ignored by the >> driver, it will just install a dynamic FDB entry in the bridge, and >> the >> bridge will age it. > > Sure, I agree that it's not necessarily an error that needs > to propagate to the user. > > My assumption, which I now see is likely false, is that drivers > could return -EOPNOTSUPP, to indicate to higher layers that the > operation > is not supported. But the higher layers may not propagate that. > > But it seems that is not the case here. So I think return 0 is fine > after all. Sorry for the noise. No noise at all... I think your concern is quite ligitimate. With this flag there is no iproute2 changes, so not to change behaviour of old commands the best is to ignore silently. But I have another flag coming up that will be accomodated with a new iproute2 command, and then your suggestion is more appropriate. The question will then be if the returns for that flag should be -EOPNOTSUPP.