On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 00:26, Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 10:19:47PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 03:20, Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

+static inline bool dsa_port_can_offload(struct dsa_port *dp,
+					struct net_device *dev)

That name is a bit generic. We have a number of different offloads.
The mv88E6060 cannot offload anything!

The name is intentionally generic as it answers the question "can this
dp offload requests for this netdev?"

I think it is a bit more specific. Mirroring is an offload, but is not
taken into account here, and does mirroring setup call this to see if
mirroring can be offloaded? The hardware has rate control traffic
shaping which we might sometime add support for via TC. That again is
an offload.

I see what you are saying.

quoted

quoted

quoted

+{
+	/* Switchdev offloading can be configured on: */
+
+	if (dev == dp->slave)
+		/* DSA ports directly connected to a bridge. */
+		return true;

This condition is the normal case of a bridged port, i.e. no LAG
involved.

quoted

quoted

+	if (dp->lag && dev == rtnl_dereference(dp->lag->dev))
+		/* DSA ports connected to a bridge via a LAG */
+		return true;

And then the indirect case of a bridged port under a LAG.

I am happy to take requests for a better name though.

There probably needs to be lag in the name.

I disagree. A LAG is one type of netdev that a DSA port can offload. The
other one is the DSA port's own netdev, i.e. what we have had since time
immemorial.

dsa_port_offloads_netdev(dp, dev)?