Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-204573-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 08:26:42 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Elad Yifee <eladwf@gmail.com>
Cc: Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>, Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>, Mark
 Lee <Mark-MC.Lee@mediatek.com>, Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@google.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Matthias Brugger
 <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
 <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>, Russell King
 <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Daniel Golle <daniel@makrotopia.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5] net: ethernet: mtk_eth_soc: ppe: add
 support for multiple PPEs
Message-ID: <20240606082642.397c0dc0@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA+SN3soxVEUUWZHMFX7OeMj56wEw7p9Q=eXXNJwiYz6Bh=pb7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20240602173247.12651-1-eladwf@gmail.com>
	<20240605194305.194286d8@kernel.org>
	<CA+SN3soxVEUUWZHMFX7OeMj56wEw7p9Q=eXXNJwiYz6Bh=pb7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 08:56:49 +0300 Elad Yifee wrote:
> > I thought Daniel's suggestion was to remove this field.
> > I don't see your rebuke to that point or how it's addressed in the code.
> > Also it would be good if you CCed Daniel, always CC people who gave you
> > feedback.  
> I talked to Daniel in private, I should have done that publicly.
> Relying solely on ifindex%ppe_num could potentially lead to more than
> one GMAC assigned to the same PPE.
> Since the ingress device could be a non mtk type, I added that sanity check.
> I think the additional field is a small price to keep things clear and simple.

Got it, could you include the justification for sticking to the current
method in the commit message, maybe?