On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Vivien Didelot
<vivien.dide...@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote:
> On Oct. Friday 09 (41) 08:20 PM, Scott Feldman wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Vivien Didelot
>> <vivien.dide...@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Jiri,
>> >
>> > On Oct. Friday 09 (41) 01:54 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>> >>
>> >> Some drivers need to implement both switchdev vlan ops and
>> >> vid_add/kill ndos. For that to work in bridge code, we need to try
>> >> switchdev op first when adding/deleting vlan id.
>> >
>> > Just curious, when would a driver need to have both operations?
>>
>> Ya, I was kind of curious of that myself. Is this because the driver
>> wants to support standalone VLANs using 802.1q module and vconfig, as
>> well as bridge vlans? With the vlan support built into the bridge,
>> I've been working under the assumption that 802.1q module (and
>> vconfig) aren't needed, and vlans for a bridged and non-bridge port
>> can be managed using the "bridge" iproute2 cmd.
>>
>> > I kinda have the same question regarding ndo_fdb_{add,del} and the
>> > bridge_{get,set}link equivalent, which is a bit confusing to me.
>>
>> I had to look back at my commit 7f109539 to remind myself about the
>> vid_add/kill ndos and bridge_{get,set}link usage. Maybe that
>> write-up helps? I'm not following you on the ndo_fdb_add/del part of
>> your question.
>
> Sorry I wasn't clear. What is confusing to me for FDB ops is that we
> define net_device_ops like:
>
> .ndo_fdb_add = switchdev_port_fdb_add,
> .ndo_fdb_del = switchdev_port_fdb_del,
> .ndo_fdb_dump = switchdev_port_fdb_dump,
>
> But if I'm not mistaken, "bridge fdb" commands use the
> .ndo_bridge_{get,set,del}link ops, isn't it?
No, the "bridge fdb" cmds use the .ndo_fdb_xxx ops.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
