[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8737plig1v.fsf@ketchup.mtl.sfl>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 21:28:28 -0400
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work
Hi David,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com> writes:
> Now that the bridge code defers the switchdev port state setting, there
> is no need to defer the port STP state change within the mv88e6xxx code.
> Thus get rid of the driver's bridge work code.
>
> This also fixes a race condition where the DSA layer assumes that the
> bridge code already set the unbridged port's STP state to Disabled
> before restoring the Forwarding state.
>
> As a consequence, this also fixes the FDB flush for the unbridged port
> which now correctly occurs during the Forwarding to Disabled transition.
>
> Fixes: 0bc05d585d38 ("switchdev: allow caller to explicitly request attr_set as deferred")
> Reported-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
This patch doesn't apply to -net, only applies to net-next...
How should I handle that, do I resend a patch for net-next with the good
subject prefix, and a v2 for -net?
Sorry for the noise,
Vivien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists