Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 06:42:07PM CET, f.faine...@gmail.com wrote:
>On 01/09/2017 08:06 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 04:45:33PM CET, vivien.dide...@savoirfairelinux.com
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Jiri,
>>>
>>> Jiri Pirko <j...@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.
>
>Maybe the use case can be understood before reverting the change. How do
>we actually the physical port number of an Ethernet switch per-port
>network device? The name is not enough, because there are plenty of
>cases where we need to manipulate a physical port number (be it just for
>informational purposes).
Like what?
Why the name is not enough? This is something propagated to userspace
and never used internally in kernel.
Btw, ndo_get_phys_port_id does not give you number, but arbitrary binary.
>
>Should we just amend the existing description of ndo_get_phys_port_id()?
>Should we introduce another ndo for that?
>--
>Florian
