From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] net: dsa: integrate with SWITCHDEV for HW bridging Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 23:53:44 -0800 Message-ID: <54F17408.4080105@roeck-us.net> References: <54EA8E7C.90401@roeck-us.net> <20150223031447.GA19267@lunn.ch> <54EAA767.6060105@roeck-us.net> <20150223042220.GA20063@lunn.ch> <54EAAEBC.6080609@roeck-us.net> <20150223133454.GB23581@lunn.ch> <54EB37C7.3090209@roeck-us.net> <20150223160109.GB27057@lunn.ch> <54EB6BF5.2020600@gmail.com> <20150223183537.GA23456@roeck-us.net> <54EDD172.4010606@nexvision.fr> <54EDDB72.1090706@roeck-us.net> <54F0A4DE.3020704@nexvision.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Andrew Lunn , netdev , David Miller , Vivien Didelot , jerome.oufella@savoirfairelinux.com, Chris Healy To: Andrey Volkov , Florian Fainelli Return-path: Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:40294 "EHLO bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750835AbbB1HyW (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Feb 2015 02:54:22 -0500 Received: from mailnull by bh-25.webhostbox.net with sa-checked (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1YRcE9-000Hy7-EO for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 07:54:21 +0000 In-Reply-To: <54F0A4DE.3020704@nexvision.fr> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/27/2015 09:09 AM, Andrey Volkov wrote: > Gunter, > > Sorry with response delay, I very was busy yesterday > > Le 25/02/2015 15:25, Guenter Roeck a =E9crit : >> Andrey, > > ------- snip ------- > >>>> >>> I simply modify port's fid to the new one in the leave routine and = set to common bridge FID in enter >>> (I'm using Marvell's chips). So the port's database will cleaned up= automatically for the leave and will >>> contain something useful at the enter time. Also I've look through = yours patches and I haven't >> >> Does removing a port from a fid clean up the entries associated with= it >> in the database ? > > I've checked what happened when port changed its FID: switch logic bl= ock traffic to it > immediately, as far as I can see, meanwhile record still exists in th= e bridge database, > it was checked on 88e6185, 88e6097 and 88e6352 chips. And yet another= 5c: changing of group membership is > not atomic operation in the Marvell's chips known for me, so the port= must be in the disabled state when it > will happened. > Hmm - interesting. I assume you mean updating port registers 5 and 6 ? Different question: For 6185, did you write a new driver or extend an e= xisting one ? I found that it is quite similar to 6131, and that adding support for i= t to the 6131 driver should be straightforward. Thanks, Guenter