Fri, May 18, 2018 at 03:41:37AM CEST, and...@lunn.ch wrote: >> >>> ds = dsa_switch_alloc(&mdiodev->dev, DSA_MAX_PORTS); >> >>> >> >>> It is allocating a switch with 12 ports. However only 4 of them have >> >>> names. So the core only creates slave devices for those 4. >> >>> >> >>> This is a useful test. Real hardware often has unused ports. A WiFi AP >> >>> with a 7 port switch which only uses 6 ports is often seen. >> >> >> >> The following patch should fix this: >> >> >> >> >> >> diff --git a/net/dsa/dsa2.c b/net/dsa/dsa2.c >> >> index adf50fbc4c13..a06c29ec91f0 100644 >> >> --- a/net/dsa/dsa2.c >> >> +++ b/net/dsa/dsa2.c >> >> @@ -262,13 +262,14 @@ static int dsa_port_setup(struct dsa_port *dp) >> >> >> >> memset(&dp->devlink_port, 0, sizeof(dp->devlink_port)); >> >> >> >> + if (dp->type == DSA_PORT_TYPE_UNUSED) >> >> + return 0; >> >> + >> >> err = devlink_port_register(ds->devlink, &dp->devlink_port, >> >> dp->index); >> > >> > Hi Florian, Jiri >> > >> > Maybe it is better to add a devlink port type unused? >> >> The port does not exist on the switch, so it should not even be >> registered IMHO. > >Hi Florian > >The ports do exist, when you called dsa_switch_alloc() you said the >switch has 12 ports.
What benefit does it have to register unused ports? What is a usecase for them. Like Florian, I also think they should not be registered. > > Andrew
