From: Russell King
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 10:32:52 +
> When a DSA port is added to a bridge and brought up, the resulting STP
> state programmed into the hardware depends on the order that these
> operations are performed. However, the Linux bridge code believes that
> the port is in disable
On 2/20/19 9:27 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 09:22:30AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 2/20/19 2:32 AM, Russell King wrote:
>>> When a DSA port is added to a bridge and brought up, the resulting STP
>>> state programmed into the hardware depends on the order that these
>>>
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 09:22:30AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 2/20/19 2:32 AM, Russell King wrote:
> > When a DSA port is added to a bridge and brought up, the resulting STP
> > state programmed into the hardware depends on the order that these
> > operations are performed. However, the L
On 2/20/19 2:32 AM, Russell King wrote:
> When a DSA port is added to a bridge and brought up, the resulting STP
> state programmed into the hardware depends on the order that these
> operations are performed. However, the Linux bridge code believes that
> the port is in disabled mode.
>
> If the
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 10:32:52 +, Russell King
wrote:
> When a DSA port is added to a bridge and brought up, the resulting STP
> state programmed into the hardware depends on the order that these
> operations are performed. However, the Linux bridge code believes that
> the port is in disabled
When a DSA port is added to a bridge and brought up, the resulting STP
state programmed into the hardware depends on the order that these
operations are performed. However, the Linux bridge code believes that
the port is in disabled mode.
If the DSA port is first added to a bridge and then brough
