Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: push blocking slaves to forwarding when turning stp off

From: Stephen Hemminger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:11:17 -0800

On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:59:11 +0200
Vitalii Demianets <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hello, Stephen!
> I can not understand your silence.
> There are issues fixed by the patch in question. For example, if the interface 
> is left in blocking state after stp was turned off, that state is not 
> stable - it can flip to forwarding state in unpredictable times, e.g. when 
> _any other_ slave of the bridge goes up or down. Do you think user wants 
> exactly that unpredictable state change?
> Also, the code in question in function br_stp_stop(), namely 
> br_port_state_selection(br) call, does exactly nothing except wasting cpu 
> cycles. Isn't it worth fixing?
> 

I had to go do real work last week.
Let me test and look at it more detail.
There is no urgency, the problem has existed for many years.