On 15-08-06 16:04:32, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Vivien
>
> Thanks for splitting up the big patch. This it is much easier to
> review now.
>
> Is this patch git bisectable?
In terms of compilation, yes.
> Clearly after this patch, but before all the other patches are in, we
> will not be programming the hardware. The call into the driver is
> removed here, but the replacement is added later. But is the EOPNOTSUP
> enough that the system keeps working, by falling back to software?
You're right, it isn't. At this exact patch, issuing the example:
bridge fdb add 3c:97:0e:11:30:6e dev swp2
returns "RTNETLINK answers: Operation not supported".
> The two driver APIs are very similar, the main difference being the
> MAC address. Can you do the refactoring first, and then make the API
> change. That means we can test each patch individually, and have
> proper git bisectability.
That'd be better indeed. I'll integrate the migration from
.fdb_{add,del,getnext} to .port_fdb_{add,del,getnext} in this patch,
then add the next patches improving FID and ATU management on top of it.
Thanks,
-v
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
