Re: [net-next v2 2/5] devlink: introduce flash update overwrite mask

[Jacob Keller]

On 8/3/2020 8:38 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 02:21:56AM CEST, jacob.e.kel...@intel.com wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +    nla_mask = info->attrs[DEVLINK_ATTR_FLASH_UPDATE_OVERWRITE_MASK];
>> +    if (nla_mask) {
>> +            if (!(supported_params & 
>> DEVLINK_SUPPORT_FLASH_UPDATE_OVERWRITE_MASK)) {
>> +                    NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(info->extack, nla_mask,
>> +                                        "overwrite is not supported");
>> +                    return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> +            }
>> +            params.overwrite_mask = nla_get_u32(nla_mask);
> 
> It's a bitfield, should be NL_ATTR_TYPE_BITFIELD32.
> 

I disagree. BITFIELD32 has both a mask and a field. This doesn't have
the notion of a mask. The bits you allow are set, the bits you don't
allow are not set. Having both a mask and a field over complicates this.