On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 04:02:37PM -0500, Vivien Didelot wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> writes: > > > @@ -1804,6 +1807,9 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_port_check_hw_vlan(struct > > dsa_switch *ds, int port, > > chip->ports[port].bridge_dev) > > break; /* same bridge, check next VLAN */ > > > > + if (!chip->ports[i].bridge_dev) > > + continue; > > + > > The above truncated test: > > if (chip->ports[i].bridge_dev == > chip->ports[port].bridge_dev) > break; /* same bridge, check next VLAN */ > > should handle the case where bridge_dev is NULL, but if you want to > explicitly test it, I'd move it before this statement. > > > netdev_warn(ds->ports[port].netdev, > > "hardware VLAN %d already used by %s\n", > > vlan.vid,
Hi Vivien I don't think you comment is correct. Here is the loop, with my two additions. for (i = 0; i < mv88e6xxx_num_ports(chip); ++i) { if (dsa_is_dsa_port(ds, i) || dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, i)) continue; if (!ds->ports[port].netdev) continue; if (vlan.data[i] == GLOBAL_VTU_DATA_MEMBER_TAG_NON_MEMBER) continue; if (chip->ports[i].bridge_dev == chip->ports[port].bridge_dev) break; /* same bridge, check next VLAN */ if (!chip->ports[i].bridge_dev) continue; netdev_warn(ds->ports[port].netdev, "hardware VLAN %d already used by %s\n", vlan.vid, netdev_name(chip->ports[i].bridge_dev)); err = -EOPNOTSUPP; goto unlock; } The opps was occurring in netdev_name(). I did not check which one. The obvious one, or the netdev_warn(netdev,... one. > The above truncated test: > > if (chip->ports[i].bridge_dev == > chip->ports[port].bridge_dev) > break; /* same bridge, check next VLAN */ > > should handle the case where bridge_dev is NULL, but if you want to > explicitly test it, I'd move it before this statement. This will not stop chip->ports[i].bridge_dev == NULL from reaching the netdev_warn(). Andrew