Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add MDB support | From | Sergei Shtylyov <> | Date | Wed, 31 Aug 2016 20:33:54 +0300 |
| |
Hello.
On 08/31/2016 05:46 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c >>> index 93abfff..812cb47 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c >>> @@ -2240,6 +2240,15 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_port_db_dump_one(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, >>> fdb->ndm_state = NUD_NOARP; >>> else >>> fdb->ndm_state = NUD_REACHABLE; >>> + } else { >> >> Rather than else, i think it would be safer to do >> >> if (obj->id == SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_MDB) { >>> + struct switchdev_obj_port_mdb *mdb; >>> + >>> + if (!is_multicast_ether_addr(addr.mac)) >>> + continue; >>> + >>> + mdb = SWITCHDEV_OBJ_PORT_MDB(obj); >>> + mdb->vid = vid; >>> + ether_addr_copy(mdb->addr, addr.mac); >>> } >> >> It should not happen, but the day it does, we get very confused... > > Do you mean the something like this? > > if (obj->id == SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_FDB) { > ... > } else if (obj->id == SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_MDB) { > ... > } else { > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > } > > I'm OK with that if you think it is better.
Just code it as a *switch*, please. :-)
[...]
MBR, Sergei
| |