[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20e56bff-b456-3301-0594-dac917416a92@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2022 12:38:09 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Ariel Elior <aelior@...vell.com>,
Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>,
Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>,
Martin Habets <habetsm.xilinx@...il.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Casper Andersson <casper.casan@...il.com>,
Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@...rochip.com>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Colin Ian King <colin.king@...el.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Xu Wang <vulab@...as.ac.cn>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@...il.com>,
Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@...nl>,
"Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@...nl>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 05/18] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove redundant
check in mv88e6xxx_port_vlan()
On 4/15/2022 5:29 AM, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
>
> We know that "dev > dst->last_switch" in the "else" block.
> In other words, that "dev - dst->last_switch" is > 0.
>
> dsa_port_bridge_num_get(dp) can be 0, but the check
> "if (bridge_num + dst->last_switch != dev) continue", rewritten as
> "if (bridge_num != dev - dst->last_switch) continue", aka
> "if (bridge_num != something which cannot be 0) continue",
> makes it redundant to have the extra "if (!bridge_num) continue" logic,
> since a bridge_num of zero would have been skipped anyway.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists