Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2023 22:44:22 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>
Cc:     netdev@kapio-technology.com, 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: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: implementation of
 dynamic ATU entries
Message-ID: <20230203204422.4wrhyathxfhj6hdt@skbuf>
References: <20230130173429.3577450-1-netdev@kapio-technology.com>
 <20230130173429.3577450-6-netdev@kapio-technology.com>
 <Y9lkXlyXg1d1D0j3@corigine.com>
 <9b12275969a204739ccfab972d90f20f@kapio-technology.com>
 <Y9zDxlwSn1EfCTba@corigine.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y9zDxlwSn1EfCTba@corigine.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 09:20:22AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> > else if (someflag)
> >         dosomething();
> > 
> > For now only one flag will actually be set and they are mutually exclusive,
> > as they will not make sense together with the potential flags I know, but
> > that can change at some time of course.
> 
> Yes, I see that is workable. I do feel that checking for other flags would
> be a bit more robust. But as you say, there are none. So whichever
> approach you prefer is fine by me.

The model we have for unsupported bits in the SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS
and SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS handlers is essentially this:

	if (flags & ~(supported_flag_mask))
		return -EOPNOTSUPP;

	if (flags & supported_flag_1)
		...

	if (flags & supported_flag_2)
		...

I suppose applying this model here would address Simon's extensibility concern.