[PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: implementation of dynamic ATU entries

[Vladimir Oltean]

On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 09:20:22AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> > else if (someflag)
> >         dosomething();
> > 
> > For now only one flag will actually be set and they are mutually exclusive,
> > as they will not make sense together with the potential flags I know, but
> > that can change at some time of course.
> 
> Yes, I see that is workable. I do feel that checking for other flags would
> be a bit more robust. But as you say, there are none. So whichever
> approach you prefer is fine by me.

The model we have for unsupported bits in the SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS
and SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS handlers is essentially this:

	if (flags & ~(supported_flag_mask))
		return -EOPNOTSUPP;

	if (flags & supported_flag_1)
		...

	if (flags & supported_flag_2)
		...

I suppose applying this model here would address Simon's extensibility concern.