From: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>

The error message is printed when the port cannot be used. Update the
error message to reflect that.

Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
---
 drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
index d2195271ffe9..3c96a62b8e0a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
@@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ static int gswip_add_single_port_br(struct gswip_priv *priv, int port, bool add)
 	int err;
 
 	if (port >= max_ports || dsa_is_cpu_port(priv->ds, port)) {
-		dev_err(priv->dev, "single port for %i supported\n", port);
+		dev_err(priv->dev, "single port for %i is not supported\n",
+			port);
 		return -EIO;
 	}
 
-- 
2.39.2

On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 10:52:31AM +0200, Martin Schiller wrote:
> From: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
> 
> The error message is printed when the port cannot be used. Update the
> error message to reflect that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
> index d2195271ffe9..3c96a62b8e0a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
> @@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ static int gswip_add_single_port_br(struct gswip_priv *priv, int port, bool add)
>  	int err;
>  
>  	if (port >= max_ports || dsa_is_cpu_port(priv->ds, port)) {
> -		dev_err(priv->dev, "single port for %i supported\n", port);
> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "single port for %i is not supported\n",
> +			port);
>  		return -EIO;
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 

Isn't even the original condition (port >= max_ports) dead code? Why not
remove the condition altogether?

On 2024-06-07 13:27, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 10:52:31AM +0200, Martin Schiller wrote:
>> From: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
>> 
>> The error message is printed when the port cannot be used. Update the
>> error message to reflect that.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl 
>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c | 3 ++-
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c 
>> b/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
>> index d2195271ffe9..3c96a62b8e0a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/lantiq_gswip.c
>> @@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ static int gswip_add_single_port_br(struct 
>> gswip_priv *priv, int port, bool add)
>>  	int err;
>> 
>>  	if (port >= max_ports || dsa_is_cpu_port(priv->ds, port)) {
>> -		dev_err(priv->dev, "single port for %i supported\n", port);
>> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "single port for %i is not supported\n",
>> +			port);
>>  		return -EIO;
>>  	}
>> 
>> --
>> 2.39.2
>> 
> 
> Isn't even the original condition (port >= max_ports) dead code? Why 
> not
> remove the condition altogether?

I also agree here if we can be sure, that .port_enable, 
.port_bridge_join and
.port_bridge_leave are only called for "valid" (<= max_ports) ports.

On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 03:34:13PM +0200, Martin Schiller wrote:
> On 2024-06-07 13:27, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Isn't even the original condition (port >= max_ports) dead code? Why not
> > remove the condition altogether?
> 
> I also agree here if we can be sure, that .port_enable, .port_bridge_join and
> .port_bridge_leave are only called for "valid" (<= max_ports) ports.

dsa_switch_parse_ports_of() has:

		if (reg >= ds->num_ports) {
			dev_err(ds->dev, "port %pOF index %u exceeds num_ports (%u)\n",
				port, reg, ds->num_ports);
			of_node_put(port);
			err = -EINVAL;
			goto out_put_node;
		}

On 2024-06-07 15:50, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 03:34:13PM +0200, Martin Schiller wrote:
>> On 2024-06-07 13:27, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>> > Isn't even the original condition (port >= max_ports) dead code? Why not
>> > remove the condition altogether?
>> 
>> I also agree here if we can be sure, that .port_enable, 
>> .port_bridge_join and
>> .port_bridge_leave are only called for "valid" (<= max_ports) ports.
> 
> dsa_switch_parse_ports_of() has:
> 
> 		if (reg >= ds->num_ports) {
> 			dev_err(ds->dev, "port %pOF index %u exceeds num_ports (%u)\n",
> 				port, reg, ds->num_ports);
> 			of_node_put(port);
> 			err = -EINVAL;
> 			goto out_put_node;
> 		}

OK, so I will remove this check altogether.