Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:06:32 +0100 | From | Jiri Pirko <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: make "label" property optional for dsa2 |
| |
Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 04:45:33PM CET, vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com wrote: >Hi Jiri, > >Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> writes: > >>>Extra question: shouldn't phys_port_{id,name} be switchdev attributes in >> >> Again, phys_port_id has nothing to do with switches. Should be removed >> from dsa because its use there is incorrect. > >Florian, since 3a543ef just got in, can it be reverted?
Yes, please revert it. It is only in net-next.
> >>>> I guess that it should be enough for you to implement >>>> ndo_get_phys_port_name. >>> >>>Well, if this name must be unique on a system, it's not likely to happen >>>until we agree that we use an ugly tXsYpZ template where X is a tree ID, >>>or we assign system-wide unique IDs to switches, which requires a bit of >>>changes. >> >> No. That should be unique within one switch. In mlxsw we name it "p1", >> "p2", ... >> >> The final netdev names are: >> enp3s0np1, enp3s0np2, ... > >OK perfect then, "p%d" sounds good. You seems to avoid "p0" in mlxsw, is >there a reason for that?
We name these according to the front panel name. There's no "port 0" on the front panel :)
> >>>But again, this is not related to this patch ;-) >> >> It is! You are using phys_port_id, which is completely wrong. You should >> not use it. > >I can resend this patch without the udev examples in the commit message >if that can be less confusing.
Yes please.
> >Thanks, > > Vivien
| |