[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE4R7bCNFAOPjf19DgGYmLChds6z5NmSYG5qmqAXGKYHySh-PQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:41:33 -0700
From: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Cc: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
"stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] bridge: vlan: combine (br|nbp)_vlan_flush
into one
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com> wrote:
> Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 02:41:09PM IDT, razor@...ckwall.org wrote:
>>From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
>>
>>As Ido Schimmel pointed out the vlan_vid_del() loop in nbp_vlan_flush is
>>unnecessary (and is actually a remnant of the old vlan code) so we can
>>remove it and combine both br/nbp vlan_flush functions into one.
> Just a small note to Scott and Vivien:
>
> One of the side effects of Nik's recent patchsets is that when VLANs are
> flushed on a port the deletion is propagated to the driver via
> switchdev ops, as __vlan_vid_del is called.
>
> Therefore there is no need to do internal bookkeeping and remove VLANs
> yourself when port is removed from bridge.
Thanks for the heads-up. Seems like a nice result.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists