From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: fix fid_mask when leaving bridge Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 07:23:22 -0700 Message-ID: <20150715142322.GA32367@roeck-us.net> References: <1436969227-30006-1-git-send-email-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@savoirfairelinux.com To: Vivien Didelot Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1436969227-30006-1-git-send-email-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:07:07AM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote: > The mv88e6xxx_priv_state structure contains an fid_mask, where 1 means > the FID is free to use, 0 means the FID is in use. > > This patch fixes the bit clear in mv88e6xxx_leave_bridge() when > assigning a new FID to a port. > > Example scenario: I have 7 ports, port 5 is CPU, port 6 is unused (no > PHY). After setting the ports 0, 1 and 2 in bridge br0, and ports 3 and > 4 in bridge br1, I have the following fid_mask: 0b111110010110 (0xf96). > > Indeed, br0 uses FID 0, and br1 uses FID 3. > > After setting nomaster for port 0, I get the wrong fid_mask: 0b10 (0x2). > > With this patch we correctly get 0b111110010100 (0xf94), meaning port 0 > uses FID 1, br0 uses FID 0, and br1 uses FID 3. > > Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck