From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Make VTU miss violations less spammy Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:11:07 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1522187980-23072-1-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch> <1522187980-23072-3-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev To: Andrew Lunn , David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:51601 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752318AbeC1SLS (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2018 14:11:18 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id v21so6587880wmc.1 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:11:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1522187980-23072-3-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/27/2018 02:59 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > VTU miss violations can happen under normal conditions. Don't spam the > kernel log. The statistics counter will indicate it is happening, if > anybody is interested. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn Reported-by: Florian Fainelli > --- > drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c | 6 ++---- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c > index 2cbaf946e7ed..e0f1b4f6e29f 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c > @@ -547,11 +547,9 @@ static irqreturn_t mv88e6xxx_g1_vtu_prob_irq_thread_fn(int irq, void *dev_id) > chip->ports[spid].vtu_member_violation++; > } > > - if (val & MV88E6XXX_G1_VTU_OP_MISS_VIOLATION) { > - dev_err_ratelimited(chip->dev, "VTU miss violation for vid %d, source port %d\n", > - entry.vid, spid); Why not keep it as a dev_dbg() message? Ideally we would want to keep those message around when the port is enslaved to a bridge, and vlan filtering is enabled. In other cases, I agree this is just spam with the current error level. > + if (val & MV88E6XXX_G1_VTU_OP_MISS_VIOLATION) > chip->ports[spid].vtu_miss_violation++; > - } > + > mutex_unlock(&chip->reg_lock); > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > -- Florian