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:   Wed, 26 Jul 2023 15:14:35 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>
Cc:     Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Atin Bainada <hi@atinb.me>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/3] net: dsa: qca8k: make learning configurable
 and keep off if standalone
Message-ID: <20230726121435.stqwc3jzjll222ck@skbuf>
References: <20230724033058.16795-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <20230724033058.16795-2-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <ZMDXFiSFI/hyr8j6@corigine.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZMDXFiSFI/hyr8j6@corigine.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 10:19:34AM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> > +int qca8k_port_pre_bridge_flags(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
> > +				struct switchdev_brport_flags flags,
> > +				struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> > +{
> > +	if (flags.mask & ~BR_LEARNING)
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> 
> If I am reading things right then some implementation of this callback
> return -EINVAL when they see unexpected flags. And some seem not to
> - possibly because all flags are expected.
> 
> So I'm slightly unsure if this is correct or not.

Which ones don't? All handlers of SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS
should return -EINVAL for changes made to bridge port flags that aren't
supported.