From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx> We know that "dev > dst->last_switch" in the "else" block. In other words, that "dev - dst->last_switch" is > 0. dsa_port_bridge_num_get(dp) can be 0, but the check "if (bridge_num + dst->last_switch != dev) continue", rewritten as "if (bridge_num != dev - dst->last_switch) continue", aka "if (bridge_num != something which cannot be 0) continue", makes it redundant to have the extra "if (!bridge_num) continue" logic, since a bridge_num of zero would have been skipped anyway. Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@xxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c index 64f4fdd02902..b3aa0e5bc842 100644 --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c @@ -1404,9 +1404,6 @@ static u16 mv88e6xxx_port_vlan(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int dev, int port) list_for_each_entry(dp, &dst->ports, list) { unsigned int bridge_num = dsa_port_bridge_num_get(dp); - if (!bridge_num) - continue; - if (bridge_num + dst->last_switch != dev) continue; -- 2.25.1