On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:37:40 +0200, Andrew Lunn <[email protected]> wrote: > > +static struct dsa_port *dsa_port_touch(struct dsa_switch *ds, int index) > > +{ > > + struct dsa_switch_tree *dst = ds->dst; > > + struct dsa_port *dp; > > + > > + dp = &ds->ports[index]; > > + > > + dp->ds = ds; > > + dp->index = index; > > + > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dp->list); > > + list_add(&dp->list, &dst->ports); > > + > > + return dp; > > +} > > Bike shedding, but i don't particularly like the name touch. How > about list. The opposite would then be delist, if we ever need it?
The fabric code uses "touch" for "get or create" already, so I used the same semantics for ports as well. But I'm not strongly attached to this naming anyway, so I will polish them all together in a future series. Thanks, Vivien
