From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754755AbaCMWQb (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:16:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.220.43]:33317 "EHLO mail-pa0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754651AbaCMWQ3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:16:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 15:16:23 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, mcgrof@suse.com, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] bridge: fix bridge root block on designated port Message-ID: <20140313151623.03e0484d@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> In-Reply-To: <1394680527-28970-4-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> References: <1394680527-28970-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <1394680527-28970-4-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:15:27 -0700 "Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote: > --- a/net/bridge/br_private.h > +++ b/net/bridge/br_private.h > @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ struct net_bridge_port > u8 priority; > u8 state; > u16 port_no; > + bool root_block_enabled; > unsigned char topology_change_ack; It seems a bit confusing to have both a ROOT_BLOCK flag in the data structure and and additional root_block_enabled flag. If nothing else it is a waste of space. Looks like you are changing the meaning slightly. is possible to have BR_ROOT_BLOCK set but !root_block_enabled? and what about the inverse?