From: Matthieu Baerts matthieu.baerts@tessares.net
commit 1b0120e4db0bf2838d1ce741195ce4b7cc100b91 upstream.
Recently, when automatically merging -net and net-next in MPTCP devel tree, our CI reported [1] a conflict in hsr, the same as the one reported by Stephen in netdev [2].
When looking at the conflict, I noticed it is in fact the v1 [3] that has been applied in -net and the v2 [4] in net-next. Maybe the v1 was applied by accident.
As mentioned by Jakub Kicinski [5], the new condition makes more sense before the net_ratelimit(), not to update net_ratelimit's state which is unnecessary if we're not going to print either way.
Here, this modification applies the v2 but in -net.
Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/4423171069 [1] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230315100914.53fc1760@canb.auug.org.au/ [2] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230307133229.127442-1-koverskeid@gmail.com/ [3] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230309092302.179586-1-koverskeid@gmail.com/ [4] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230308232001.2fb62013@kernel.org/ [5] Fixes: 28e8cabe80f3 ("net: hsr: Don't log netdev_err message on unknown prp dst node") Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts matthieu.baerts@tessares.net Reviewed-by: Steen Hegelund Steen.Hegelund@microchip.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230315-net-20230315-hsr_framereg-ratelimit-v1-1-... Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski kuba@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c +++ b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c @@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ void hsr_addr_subst_dest(struct hsr_node node_dst = find_node_by_addr_A(&port->hsr->node_db, eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest); if (!node_dst) { - if (net_ratelimit() && port->hsr->prot_version != PRP_V1) + if (port->hsr->prot_version != PRP_V1 && net_ratelimit()) netdev_err(skb->dev, "%s: Unknown node\n", __func__); return; }