On 8/23/21 1:45 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 11:37:28PM +0000, Alvin Šipraga wrote: >>>>>> + skb->offload_fwd_mark = 1; >>>>> >>>>> At the very least, please use >>>>> >>>>> dsa_default_offload_fwd_mark(skb); >>>>> >>>>> which does the right thing when the port is not offloading the bridge. >>>> >>>> Sure. Can you elaborate on what you mean by "at the very least"? Can it >>>> be improved even further? >>> >>> The elaboration is right below. skb->offload_fwd_mark should be set to >>> zero for packets that have been forwarded only to the host (like packets >>> that have hit a trapping rule). I guess the switch will denote this >>> piece of info through the REASON code. >> >> Yes, I think it will be communicated in REASON too. I haven't gotten to >> deciphering the contents of this field since it has not been needed so >> far: the ports are fully isolated and all bridging is done in software. > > In that case, setting skb->offload_fwd_mark to true is absolutely wrong, > since the bridge is told that no software forwarding should be done > between ports, as it was already done in hardware (see nbp_switchdev_allowed_egress). > > I wonder how this has ever worked? Are you completely sure that bridging > is done in software? You are absolutely right, and indeed I checked just now and the bridging is not working at all. Deleting the line (i.e. skb->offload_fwd_mark = 0) restores the expected bridging behaviour. Based on what you have said, do I understand correctly that offload_fwd_mark shouldn't be set until bridge hardware offloading has been implemented? Thanks for your detailed review so far.
