On 29.05.2024 02:02, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>
> 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 :)
Yea, copy paste mistakes :)
>
> 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.
I like it too, I'll change it "local-forwarding"
>
> Thanks,
> Jake
