Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
net: x25: Remove unimplemented X.25-over-LLC code stubs
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
According to the X.25 documentation, there was a plan to implement
X.25-over-802.2-LLC. It never finished but left various code stubs in the
X.25 code. At this time it is unlikely that it would ever finish so it
may be better to remove those code stubs.

Also change the documentation to make it clear that this is not a ongoing
plan anymore. Change words like "will" to "could", "would", etc.

Cc: Martin Schiller <ms@dev.tdt.de>
Signed-off-by: Xie He <xie.he.0141@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201209033346.83742-1-xie.he.0141@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
  • Loading branch information
Xie He authored and kuba-moo committed Dec 13, 2020
1 parent 0b9b241 commit 13458ff
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 4 changed files with 7 additions and 31 deletions.
12 changes: 5 additions & 7 deletions Documentation/networking/x25.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -19,13 +19,11 @@ implementation of LAPB. Therefore the LAPB modules would be called by
unintelligent X.25 card drivers and not by intelligent ones, this would
provide a uniform device driver interface, and simplify configuration.

To confuse matters a little, an 802.2 LLC implementation for Linux is being
written which will allow X.25 to be run over an Ethernet (or Token Ring) and
conform with the JNT "Pink Book", this will have a different interface to
the Packet Layer but there will be no confusion since the class of device
being served by the LLC will be completely separate from LAPB. The LLC
implementation is being done as part of another protocol project (SNA) and
by a different author.
To confuse matters a little, an 802.2 LLC implementation is also possible
which could allow X.25 to be run over an Ethernet (or Token Ring) and
conform with the JNT "Pink Book", this would have a different interface to
the Packet Layer but there would be no confusion since the class of device
being served by the LLC would be completely separate from LAPB.

Just when you thought that it could not become more confusing, another
option appeared, XOT. This allows X.25 Packet Layer frames to operate over
Expand Down
6 changes: 1 addition & 5 deletions net/x25/af_x25.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -211,11 +211,7 @@ static int x25_device_event(struct notifier_block *this, unsigned long event,
if (!net_eq(dev_net(dev), &init_net))
return NOTIFY_DONE;

if (dev->type == ARPHRD_X25
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LLC)
|| dev->type == ARPHRD_ETHER
#endif
) {
if (dev->type == ARPHRD_X25) {
switch (event) {
case NETDEV_REGISTER:
case NETDEV_POST_TYPE_CHANGE:
Expand Down
13 changes: 0 additions & 13 deletions net/x25/x25_dev.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -160,10 +160,6 @@ void x25_establish_link(struct x25_neigh *nb)
*ptr = X25_IFACE_CONNECT;
break;

#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LLC)
case ARPHRD_ETHER:
return;
#endif
default:
return;
}
Expand All @@ -179,10 +175,6 @@ void x25_terminate_link(struct x25_neigh *nb)
struct sk_buff *skb;
unsigned char *ptr;

#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LLC)
if (nb->dev->type == ARPHRD_ETHER)
return;
#endif
if (nb->dev->type != ARPHRD_X25)
return;

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -212,11 +204,6 @@ void x25_send_frame(struct sk_buff *skb, struct x25_neigh *nb)
*dptr = X25_IFACE_DATA;
break;

#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LLC)
case ARPHRD_ETHER:
kfree_skb(skb);
return;
#endif
default:
kfree_skb(skb);
return;
Expand Down
7 changes: 1 addition & 6 deletions net/x25/x25_route.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -124,12 +124,7 @@ struct net_device *x25_dev_get(char *devname)
{
struct net_device *dev = dev_get_by_name(&init_net, devname);

if (dev &&
(!(dev->flags & IFF_UP) || (dev->type != ARPHRD_X25
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LLC)
&& dev->type != ARPHRD_ETHER
#endif
))){
if (dev && (!(dev->flags & IFF_UP) || dev->type != ARPHRD_X25)) {
dev_put(dev);
dev = NULL;
}
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 13458ff

Please sign in to comment.