Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] switchdev: update documentation for offload_fwd_mark

On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Simon Horman [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 04:16:43PM -0700, sfeldma@gmail.com wrote:

quoted

From: Scott Feldman <redacted>

Signed-off-by: Scott Feldman <redacted>
---
 Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt |   14 ++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt b/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt
index c5d7ade..b864e47 100644
--- a/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt
+++ b/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt

@@ -279,8 +279,18 @@ and unknown unicast packets to all ports in domain, if allowed by port's
 current STP state.  The switch driver, knowing which ports are within which
 vlan L2 domain, can program the switch device for flooding.  The packet should
 also be sent to the port netdev for processing by the bridge driver.  The
-bridge should not reflood the packet to the same ports the device flooded.
-XXX: the mechanism to avoid duplicate flood packets is being discuseed.
+bridge should not reflood the packet to the same ports the device flooded,
+otherwise there will be duplicate packets on the wire.
+
+To avoid duplicate packets, the device/driver can mark a packet as already

I wonder if  'should' or 'may' would be clearer than 'can'.

'should' sounds better; v2.