On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 09:31:42PM +0200, Alvin Šipraga wrote:
> +static bool rtl8365mb_is_vlan_valid(struct realtek_smi *smi, unsigned int vlan)
Maybe it would be more efficient to make smi->ops->is_vlan_valid optional?
> +{
> + if (vlan > RTL8365MB_VIDMAX)
> + return false;
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +static int rtl8365mb_enable_vlan(struct realtek_smi *smi, bool enable)
> +{
> + dev_dbg(smi->dev, "%s VLAN\n", enable ? "enable" : "disable");
> + return regmap_update_bits(
> + smi->map, RTL8365MB_VLAN_CTRL_REG, RTL8365MB_VLAN_CTRL_EN_MASK,
> + FIELD_PREP(RTL8365MB_VLAN_CTRL_EN_MASK, enable ? 1 : 0));
> +}
> +
> +static int rtl8365mb_enable_vlan4k(struct realtek_smi *smi, bool enable)
> +{
> + return rtl8365mb_enable_vlan(smi, enable);
> +}
I'm not going to lie, the realtek_smi_ops VLAN methods seem highly
cryptic to me. Why do you do the same thing from .enable_vlan4k as from
.enable_vlan? What are these supposed to do in the first place?
Or to quote from rtl8366_vlan_add: "what's with this 4k business?"
Also, stupid question: what do you need the VLAN ops for if you haven't
implemented .port_bridge_join and .port_bridge_leave? How have you
tested them?
