Message ID | 20201031102916.667619-3-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
Series | VLAN improvements for Ocelot switch | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
jkicinski/cover_letter | success | Link |
jkicinski/fixes_present | success | Link |
jkicinski/patch_count | success | Link |
jkicinski/tree_selection | success | Clearly marked for net-next |
jkicinski/subject_prefix | success | Link |
jkicinski/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
jkicinski/verify_signedoff | success | Link |
jkicinski/module_param | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
jkicinski/build_32bit | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
jkicinski/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
jkicinski/verify_fixes | success | Link |
jkicinski/checkpatch | success | total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 10 lines checked |
jkicinski/build_allmodconfig_warn | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
jkicinski/header_inline | success | Link |
jkicinski/stable | success | Stable not CCed |
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c index bc5b15d7bce7..ae25a79bf907 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c @@ -293,10 +293,6 @@ int ocelot_vlan_del(struct ocelot *ocelot, int port, u16 vid) if (ret) return ret; - /* Ingress */ - if (ocelot_port->pvid == vid) - ocelot_port_set_pvid(ocelot, port, 0); - /* Egress */ if (ocelot_port->vid == vid) ocelot_port_set_native_vlan(ocelot, port, 0);
I have no idea why this code is here, but I have 2 hypotheses: 1. A desperate attempt to keep untagged traffic working when the bridge deletes the pvid on a port. There was a fairly okay discussion here: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CA+h21hrRMrLH-RjBGhEJSTZd6_QPRSd3RkVRQF-wNKkrgKcRSA@mail.gmail.com/#t which established that in vlan_filtering=1 mode, the absence of a pvid should denote that the ingress port should drop untagged and priority tagged traffic. While in vlan_filtering=0 mode, nothing should change. So in vlan_filtering=1 mode, we should simply let things happen, and not attempt to save the day. And in vlan_filtering=0 mode, the pvid is 0 anyway, no need to do anything. 2. The driver encodes the native VLAN (ocelot_port->vid) value of 0 as special, meaning "not valid". There are checks based on that. But there are no such checks for the ocelot_port->pvid value of 0. In fact, that's a perfectly valid value, which is used in standalone mode. Maybe there was some confusion and the author thought that 0 means "invalid" here as well. In conclusion, delete the code*. *in fact we'll add it back later, in a slightly different form, but for an entirely different reason than the one for which this exists now. Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com> --- drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)