On 06/06/2017 01:56 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> The mv88e6xxx driver currently tries to be smart and remove by itself a
> VLAN entry from the VTU when the driven switch sees no user ports as
> members of the VLAN.
>
> This is bad in a multi-chip switch fabric, since a chip in between
> others may have no bridge port members, but still needs to be aware of
> the VID in order to correctly pass frames in the data path.
>
> Remove the code purging a VTU entry when updating a port membership.
In that case the switch sitting between two other chips and passing
traffic would still have at least two of its DSA ports be part of a VTU
entry, right?
So could not we just do ....
>
> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot <vivien.dide...@savoirfairelinux.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 15 +--------------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
> b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
> index 522f023bb17e..64c0f88f9e79 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
> @@ -1325,9 +1325,8 @@ static void mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_add(struct dsa_switch
> *ds, int port,
> static int _mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_del(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
> int port, u16 vid)
> {
> - struct dsa_switch *ds = chip->ds;
> struct mv88e6xxx_vtu_entry vlan;
> - int i, err;
> + int err;
>
> err = mv88e6xxx_vtu_get(chip, vid, &vlan, false);
> if (err)
> @@ -1339,18 +1338,6 @@ static int _mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_del(struct
> mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
>
> vlan.member[port] = GLOBAL_VTU_DATA_MEMBER_TAG_NON_MEMBER;
>
> - /* keep the VLAN unless all ports are excluded */
> - vlan.valid = false;
> - for (i = 0; i < mv88e6xxx_num_ports(chip); ++i) {
> - if (dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, i) || dsa_is_dsa_port(ds, i))
> - continue;
... break the loop here?
> -
> - if (vlan.member[i] != GLOBAL_VTU_DATA_MEMBER_TAG_NON_MEMBER) {
> - vlan.valid = true;
> - break;
> - }
> - }
> -
> err = mv88e6xxx_vtu_loadpurge(chip, &vlan);
> if (err)
> return err;
>
--
Florian
