Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 5 May 2018 17:39:05 +0200 | From | Andrew Lunn <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: drop some VLAs in switch.c |
| |
On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 12:36:36PM +0200, Salvatore Mesoraca wrote: > 2018-03-13 21:06 GMT+01:00 Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>: > > On 03/13/2018 12:58 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote: > >> Hi Salvatore, > >> > >> Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >>> dsa_switch's num_ports is currently fixed to DSA_MAX_PORTS. So we avoid > >>> 2 VLAs[1] by using DSA_MAX_PORTS instead of ds->num_ports. > >>> > >>> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621 > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com> > >> > >> NAK. > >> > >> We are in the process to remove hardcoded limits such as DSA_MAX_PORTS > >> and DSA_MAX_SWITCHES, so we have to stick with ds->num_ports. > > > > Then this means that we need to allocate a bitmap from the heap, which > > sounds a bit superfluous and could theoretically fail... not sure which > > way is better, but bumping the size to DSA_MAX_PORTS definitively does > > help people working on enabling -Wvla. > > Hi Florian, > > Should I consider this patch still NAKed or not? > Should I resend the patch with some modifications?
Hi Salvatore
We have been removing all uses of DSA_MAX_PORTS. I don't particularly like arbitrary limits on how many ports a switch can have, or how many switches a board can have.
So i would prefer to not use DSA_MAX_PORTS here.
You could make the bitmap part of the dsa_switch structure. This is allocated by dsa_switch_alloc() and is passed the number of ports. Doing the allocation there means you don't need to worry about it failing in dsa_switch_mdb_add() or dsa_switch_vlan_add().
Andrew
| |