Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 00:00:06 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com>
Cc:     Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@mediatek.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Eric Woudstra <ericwouds@gmail.com>,
        =?utf-8?B?UmVuw6k=?= van Dorst <opensource@vdorst.com>,
        Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@public-files.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next v2 3/4] net: dsa: mt7530: set STP state also on
 filter ID 1
Message-ID: <20210802210006.fhmb5s6dsnziyk7d@skbuf>
References: <20210731191023.1329446-1-dqfext@gmail.com>
 <20210731191023.1329446-4-dqfext@gmail.com>
 <20210802134336.gv66le6u2z52kfkh@skbuf>
 <20210802153129.1817825-1-dqfext@gmail.com>
 <20210802154226.qggqzkxe6urkx3yf@skbuf>
 <20210802155810.1818085-1-dqfext@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210802155810.1818085-1-dqfext@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:58:10PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 06:42:26PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:31:29PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote:
> > > The current code only sets FID 0's STP state. This patch sets both 0's and
> > > 1's states.
> > >
> > > The *5 part is binary magic. [1:0] is FID 0's state, [3:2] is FID 1's state
> > > and so on. Since 5 == 4'b0101, the value in [1:0] is copied to [3:2] after
> > > the multiplication.
> > >
> > > Perhaps I should only change FID 1's state.
> >
> > Keep the patches dumb for us mortals please.
> > If you only change FID 1's state, I am concerned that the driver no
> > longer initializes FID 0's port state, and might leave that to the
> > default set by other pre-kernel initialization stage (bootloader?).
> > So even if you might assume that standalone ports are FORWARDING, they
> > might not be.
>
> The default value is forwarding, and the switch is reset by the driver
> so any pre-kernel initialization stage is no more.

So then change the port STP state only for FID 1 and resend. Any other
reason why this patch series is marked RFC? It looked okay to me otherwise.