[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230330165123.4n2bmvuaixfz34tb@skbuf>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 19:51:23 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Clément Léger <clement.leger@...tlin.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>,
Miquèl Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Milan Stevanovic <milan.stevanovic@...com>,
Jimmy Lalande <jimmy.lalande@...com>,
Pascal Eberhard <pascal.eberhard@...com>,
Alexis Lothoré <alexis.lothore@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: dsa: rzn1-a5psw: enable DPBU for CPU
port and fix STP states
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 05:44:27PM +0200, Clément Léger wrote:
> Le Thu, 30 Mar 2023 18:16:53 +0300,
> Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> a écrit :
>
> > Have you considered adding some Fixes: tags and sending to the "net" tree?
>
> I wasn't sure if due to the refactoring that should go directly to the
> net tree but I'll do that. But since they are fixes, that's the way to
> go.
My common sense says that code quality comes first, and so, the code
looks however it needs to look, keeping in mind that it still needs to
be a punctual fix for the problem. This doesn't change the fact that
it's a fix for an an observable bug, and so, it's a candidate for 'net'.
That's just my opinion though, others may disagree.
> > To be absolutely clear, when talking about BPDUs, is it applicable
> > effectively only to STP protocol frames, or to any management traffic
> > sent by tag_rzn1_a5psw.c which has A5PSW_CTRL_DATA_FORCE_FORWARD set?
>
> The documentation uses BPDUs but this is to be understood as in a
> broader sense for "management frames" since it matches all the MAC with
> "01-80-c2-00-00-XX".
And even so, is it just for frames sent to "01-80-c2-00-00-XX", or for
all frames sent with A5PSW_CTRL_DATA_FORCE_FORWARD? Other switch
families can inject whatever they want into ports that are in the
BLOCKING STP state.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists