Re: [RFC net-next 1/6] ethernet: add a helper for assigning port addresses

On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 14:36:00 -0700 Shannon Nelson wrote:

On 10/15/21 12:38 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

quoted

We have 5 drivers which offset base MAC addr by port id.
Create a helper for them.

This helper takes care of overflows, which some drivers
did not do, please complain if that's going to break
anything!

quoted

+/**
+ * eth_hw_addr_set_port - Generate and assign Ethernet address to a port
+ * @dev: pointer to port's net_device structure
+ * @base_addr: base Ethernet address
+ * @id: offset to add to the base address
+ *
+ * Assign a MAC address to the net_device using a base address and an offset.
+ * Commonly used by switch drivers which need to compute addresses for all
+ * their ports. addr_assign_type is not changed.
+ */
+static inline void eth_hw_addr_set_port(struct net_device *dev,
+					const u8 *base_addr, u8 id)  

To me, the words "_set_port" imply that you're going to force "id" into 
the byte, overwriting what is already there.  Since this instead is 
adding "id" to the byte, perhaps a better name would include the word 
"offset", maybe like eth_hw_addr_set_port_offset(), to better imply the 
actual operation.

Personally, I think my name suggestion is too long, but it gets my 
thought across.

I started with eth_hw_addr_set_offset() my thought process was:

  .._set_offset() sounds like it's setting the offset

  dev_addr_mod() uses offset to modify just part of the address
  so we have two similar functions using 'offset' with different 
  meaning

  how about we name it after the most common use? -> .._port()

Thinking again maybe eth_hw_addr_gen()? We "generate" a port address
based on base address and port ID.

I can change if others agree that .._set_offset() is better.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel