Hi Russell,
On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 16:32:34 +0000, Russell King <[email protected]>
wrote:
> +static int mv88e6xxx_port_bridge_flags(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
> + unsigned long flags)
> +{
> + struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip = ds->priv;
> + bool unicast, multicast;
> + int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + unicast = dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, port) || dsa_is_dsa_port(ds, port) ||
> + flags & BR_FLOOD;
> + multicast = flags & BR_MCAST_FLOOD;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&chip->reg_lock);
> + if (chip->info->ops->port_set_egress_floods)
> + ret = chip->info->ops->port_set_egress_floods(chip, port,
> + unicast,
> + multicast);
> + mutex_unlock(&chip->reg_lock);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned long mv88e6xxx_bridge_flags_support(struct dsa_switch *ds)
> +{
> + struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip = ds->priv;
> + unsigned long support = 0;
> +
> + if (chip->info->ops->port_set_egress_floods)
> + support |= BR_FLOOD | BR_MCAST_FLOOD;
> +
> + return support;
> +}
I think that it isn't necessary to propagate the notion of bridge flags down
to the DSA drivers. It might be just enough to add:
port_egress_flood(dsa_switch *ds, int port, bool uc, bool mc)
to dsa_switch_ops and set BR_FLOOD | BR_MCAST_FLOOD from the DSA core,
if the targeted driver has ds->ops->port_set_egress_flood. What do you think?
Thanks,
Vivien
