| Message ID | 20190211191001.8623-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | net: Remove switchdev_ops | expand |
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:09:52 -0800 > David, I would like to get Ido's feedback on this to make sure I did not > miss something, thank you! Ok, Ido please look at this when you can.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:16:57PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:09:52 -0800 > > > David, I would like to get Ido's feedback on this to make sure I did not > > miss something, thank you! > > Ok, Ido please look at this when you can. Will review tomorrow. I was occupied with other stuff last couple of days. Sorry
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09:52AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch series finishes by the removal of switchdev_ops. To get there > we convert the existing switchdev_port_attr_{set,get} switchdev_ops to > use a blocking notifier, thus making it consistent with how the objects > are pushed to the switchdev enabled devices. > > Please review and let me know what you think! > > David, I would like to get Ido's feedback on this to make sure I did not > miss something, thank you! Hi Florian, Why do you still keep switchdev_port_attr_get()? I believe we can remove it and simplify things. After your recent patchset to remove 'PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS', the only remaining user of get() is 'PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS_SUPPORT'. It can be converted to a blocking set() with 'PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS' (or a similar name). I would like to make sure we're in sync with regards to future changes. After this patchset to get rid of switchdev_ops we can continue to completely removing switchdev (I believe Jiri approves). The prepare-commit model is not really needed and the two switchdev notification chains can be split into bridge and vxlan specific chains. Notifications sent in an atomic context can be handled by drivers directly in this context. Similar to how FDB/route/neighbour are handled. It will really simplify things. No need for the defer flag anymore and tricks like 'PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS_SUPPORT' and 'PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS'. In the atomic context the driver can veto the requested bridge flags, but program the device from a blocking context (using a workqueue).
Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 02:14:47PM CET, idosch@mellanox.com wrote: >On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09:52AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> This patch series finishes by the removal of switchdev_ops. To get there >> we convert the existing switchdev_port_attr_{set,get} switchdev_ops to >> use a blocking notifier, thus making it consistent with how the objects >> are pushed to the switchdev enabled devices. >> >> Please review and let me know what you think! >> >> David, I would like to get Ido's feedback on this to make sure I did not >> miss something, thank you! > >Hi Florian, > >Why do you still keep switchdev_port_attr_get()? I believe we can remove >it and simplify things. > >After your recent patchset to remove 'PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS', the only >remaining user of get() is 'PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS_SUPPORT'. It can be >converted to a blocking set() with 'PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS' (or a similar >name). Let's do that in a follow-up. > >I would like to make sure we're in sync with regards to future changes. >After this patchset to get rid of switchdev_ops we can continue to >completely removing switchdev (I believe Jiri approves). The Yes. >prepare-commit model is not really needed and the two switchdev >notification chains can be split into bridge and vxlan specific chains. > >Notifications sent in an atomic context can be handled by drivers >directly in this context. Similar to how FDB/route/neighbour are >handled. It will really simplify things. No need for the defer flag >anymore and tricks like 'PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS_SUPPORT' and >'PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS'. In the atomic context the driver can veto the >requested bridge flags, but program the device from a blocking context >(using a workqueue). Sounds good to me.
Hi all, This patch series finishes by the removal of switchdev_ops. To get there we convert the existing switchdev_port_attr_{set,get} switchdev_ops to use a blocking notifier, thus making it consistent with how the objects are pushed to the switchdev enabled devices. Please review and let me know what you think! David, I would like to get Ido's feedback on this to make sure I did not miss something, thank you! Changes in v4: - removed double space in Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt - added Jiri's Acked-by tags - added fall through annotations where appropriate Changes in v3: - dropped patches removing te need to get the attribute since we still need that in order to support different sleeping vs. non-sleeping contexts Changes in v2: - fixed bisectability issues in patch #15 - added Acked-by from Jiri where necessary - fixed a few minor issues according to Jiri's feedback: - rename port_attr_event -> port_attr_set_event - moved SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_SET closer to other blocking events Florian Fainelli (9): Documentation: networking: switchdev: Update port parent ID section switchdev: Add SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_SET, SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_GET rocker: Handle SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_GET/SET mlxsw: spectrum_switchdev: Handle SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_GET/SET net: mscc: ocelot: Handle SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_GET/SET staging: fsl-dpaa2: ethsw: Handle SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_GET/SET net: dsa: Handle SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_GET/SET net: switchdev: Replace port attr get/set SDO with a notification net: Remove switchdev_ops Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt | 10 +- .../net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c | 12 -- .../net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.h | 2 - .../mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_switchdev.c | 36 +++--- drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c | 26 ++++- drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker_main.c | 30 ++++- drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethsw/ethsw.c | 30 ++++- include/linux/netdevice.h | 3 - include/net/switchdev.h | 28 ++--- net/dsa/slave.c | 30 ++++- net/switchdev/switchdev.c | 107 ++++++------------ 11 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 146 deletions(-)