Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: provide shim definition for br_vlan_flags

On 27/10/2021 22:45, Vladimir Oltean wrote:

On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 10:28:12PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:

quoted

On 27/10/2021 19:21, Vladimir Oltean wrote:

quoted

br_vlan_replay() needs this, and we're preparing to move it to
br_switchdev.c, which will be compiled regardless of whether or not
CONFIG_BRIDGE_VLAN_FILTERING is enabled.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
---
 net/bridge/br_private.h | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/net/bridge/br_private.h b/net/bridge/br_private.h
index 3c9327628060..cc31c3fe1e02 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_private.h
+++ b/net/bridge/br_private.h

@@ -1708,6 +1708,11 @@ static inline bool br_vlan_can_enter_range(const struct net_bridge_vlan *v_curr,
 	return true;
 }
 
+static inline u16 br_vlan_flags(const struct net_bridge_vlan *v, u16 pvid)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static inline int br_vlan_replay(struct net_device *br_dev,
 				 struct net_device *dev, const void *ctx,
 				 bool adding, struct notifier_block *nb,

hm, shouldn't the vlan replay be a shim if bridge vlans are not defined?
I.e. shouldn't this rather be turned into br_vlan_replay's shim?

TBH, I haven't looked into the details just wonder why we would compile all that vlan
code if bridge vlan filtering is not enabled.

The main reason is that I would like to avoid #ifdef if possible. If you
have a strong opinion otherwise I can follow suit.

Well, I see that we add ifdefs for IGMP, so I don't see a reason why not
to ifdef out the vlan replay in the same way too.

I don't have a strong preference either way, end result is the same.