[PATCH net-next v5 05/18] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: remove redundant check in mv88e6xxx_port_vlan()

[Jakob Koschel]

From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean at nxp.com>

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 at nxp.com>
Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel at gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli at gmail.com>
---
 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