From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D630283686; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 01:54:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769824480; cv=none; b=WVmSBo+7eflFT5dHpl7vjnbn0NAY+w0HRNeUtoYAHHnv1EzitJ6/64D4TO6bcVHJdSWQ6Spq9froLUrah1xPavum8Mh+gg0bEn2hirGB2yDU/B28iCOSoXrIbT+MPYZdRhnkrUl54zaGll9i1W7nxhV/uD7Euln/a872HkDl+XM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769824480; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mwWaS4H/LxHe5XEFQqTOAXnZqbeC9QaLnwYKAnsw5zA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=erYG1Hb8Y4OqlTY0vNyGB2QZqi58eKljV4x0foCMkBmUyQbz/hQFFCcjrSVvLjRN+wTMQhU42yRI7LfJEMouO0hA6Ja/aDsYkDyUwDYLz58rgmw6xD3EN+sq7B0pvh/dVDmNClEjvhCHqHxbdS0Els1Dx+1vLLUOlBGdmVQj9ws= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=A6jsBIXW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="A6jsBIXW" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 307CFC19421; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 01:54:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1769824480; bh=mwWaS4H/LxHe5XEFQqTOAXnZqbeC9QaLnwYKAnsw5zA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=A6jsBIXW6Zwo5I+kZ/SjmoTdAmJhFmdiNiMuU9spwWhbSDAK5BSn6E018EOXF1RKX eLnJOnRCxSd63EKnPdwRYh+q9TXS4HoTLUwcDSYxgfd0WUPNZT6Q1KAfHuG91C7kjp oJbKG79e9JmT3w0ATU6qRap31lvoBppmcOtfWRZY/g3ynv3yEcDdIfqrZIlype8/a7 /4AgqSAJiRnReNTQzEOtBAWSU14RFeYus/4f6fkRw+6nbEXCh7+LLxyhpko81LQlhq FWDWLT6Ca0XPk6S5KnT0WlCsCrf4Wh7i7EVtXUixtyIQmG577FAklQ+9w3L9yQWzld gF5wLQSIWRP7A== From: Jakub Kicinski To: lukasz.majewski@mailbox.org Cc: Jakub Kicinski , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, horms@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de, richardcochran@gmail.com, shawnguo@kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, pabeni@redhat.com, wahrenst@gmx.net, davem@davemloft.net, festevam@gmail.com, conor+dt@kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, andrew@lunn.ch, robh@kernel.org Subject: Re: [net-next,v21,6/7] net: mtip: Extend the L2 switch driver with management operations Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2026 17:54:37 -0800 Message-ID: <20260131015438.972436-1-kuba@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.52.0 In-Reply-To: <20260129110154.1699976-7-lukasz.majewski@mailbox.org> References: <20260129110154.1699976-7-lukasz.majewski@mailbox.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible. For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html --- net: mtip: Extend the L2 switch driver with management operations This patch adds management functions for the L2 switch including VLAN configuration, port learning/blocking, multicast/broadcast control, and forced forwarding for port separation. > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/mtipsw/mtipl2sw_mgnt.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/mtipsw/mtipl2sw_mgnt.c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/mtipsw/mtipl2sw_mgnt.c [ ... ] > +int mtip_vlan_input_process(struct switch_enet_private *fep, > + int port, int mode, unsigned short port_vlanid, > + int vlan_verify_en, int vlan_domain_num, > + int vlan_domain_port) > +{ > + /* Only modes from 1 to 4 are valid*/ > + if (mode < 0 || mode > 4) { ^^^^ The comment says modes 1-4 are valid, but the condition allows mode 0 to pass through. Should the check be "mode < 1" instead, or is the comment incorrect and mode 0 is actually valid? > + dev_err(&fep->pdev->dev, > + "%s: VLAN input processing mode (%d) not supported\n", > + __func__, mode); > + return -EINVAL; > + } [ ... ]