Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work

[David Miller]

From: Vivien Didelot 
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 11:39:23 -0400

> Do we want to send this fix to -net as well?

net isn't open and is irrelevant right now, everything goes through the net-next
tree since we are in the merge window.

Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work

[Vivien Didelot]

Hi Andrew,

Andrew Lunn  writes:

>> Do we want to send this fix to -net as well?
>
> I don't see this bug as being highly critical that it needs to be
> fixed immediately.
>
> I would suggest we wait until -rc1 is out, and then produce a backport
> version. Given the changes we have made to that driver, there is
> little chance the existing fix will cherry-pick backwards.

Sounds good to me!

Thanks,

Vivien

Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work

[Andrew Lunn]

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:39:23AM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> David Miller  writes:
> 
> > From: Vivien Didelot 
> > Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 21:28:28 -0400
> >
> >> Hi David,
> >> 
> >> Vivien Didelot  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 
> >>> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot 
> >> 
> >> 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?
> >
> > I applied this to net-next, thanks.
> 
> Do we want to send this fix to -net as well?

Hi Vivien

I don't see this bug as being highly critical that it needs to be
fixed immediately.

I would suggest we wait until -rc1 is out, and then produce a backport
version. Given the changes we have made to that driver, there is
little chance the existing fix will cherry-pick backwards.

   Andrew

Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work

[Vivien Didelot]

Hi David,

David Miller  writes:

> From: Vivien Didelot 
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 21:28:28 -0400
>
>> Hi David,
>> 
>> Vivien Didelot  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 
>>> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot 
>> 
>> 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?
>
> I applied this to net-next, thanks.

Do we want to send this fix to -net as well?

Thanks,

Vivien

Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work

[David Miller]

From: Vivien Didelot 
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 21:28:28 -0400

> Hi David,
> 
> Vivien Didelot  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 
>> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot 
> 
> 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?

I applied this to net-next, thanks.

Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove bridge work

[Vivien Didelot]

Hi David,

Vivien Didelot  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 
> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot 

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