On 5/28/2024 12:16 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 13:01:32 +0200 Wojciech Drewek wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH iwl-net v2] ice: Add support for devlink loopback param.
>
> iwl-next, presumably
>
> Param makes sense, although the name keeps giving me pause.
> I expect "loopback" will control either port loopback or something
> like hairpin. Would "local-forwarding" not be a better name?
> Not a big deal, I guess.
>
>> + ``enabled`` - loopback traffic is not allowed on port
>> +
>> + ``disabled`` - loopback traffic is allowed on this port
>
> The meaning seems inverted?
Yea this doesn't seem like a bug fix, but implementing a new feature :)
I like local-forwarding too, but its not a huge deal overall. It should
definitely be fixed to match intuition with respect to what enabled and
disabled mean.
Thanks,
Jake
