On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 04:39:05PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew, Florian,
>
> Here again, I'd suggested an implicit namespace for functions taking a
> dsa_switch_tree structure as first argument, i.e. dsa_tree_do_foo().
Using tree actually makes things worse, since tree is never used
anywhere in the current code. It is always called dst. If you do this,
you also need to replace every instance of dst with tree.
We mostly have a good convention
struct dsa_switch *ds;
dsa_switch_tree *dst;
What is not quite consistent is
struct dsa_chip_data *cd
which should really be
struct dsa_chip_data *dcd
but we are consistent with using cd everywhere.
> Since we are likely to spend some time in net/dsa, it'd be great to
> introduce the new bindings and an intuitive API at the same time ;-)
They are two separate things. And the binding will be set in stone,
never to be changed again in incompatible ways, where as the API we
can change as much as we like. We should be concentrate on the
binding.
Andrew
