On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 11:44:21AM +0200, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> > Do you expect this optimization to only work when physical netdevs are
> > enslaved to the bridge? What about LAG/VLANs?
>
> LAGs should definitely work once the .ndo_dfwd_{add,del}_station helpers
> are in place.
>
> Stacked VLANs could also be made to work. But they may require some
> extra work.
>
> In v1, the bridge will always send offloaded frames with the VLAN
> information intact, even if the port is configured to egress the VID
> untagged. This is needed so that the driver can determine the correct
> VID to use in cases where multiple VIDs are set to egress untagged.
>
> If any kind of VID translation takes place I think things get very
> sticky. Then again, that is maybe not all that defined without this
> change applied either?
>
> What is the typical use-case for using an "external" stacked VLAN device
> over configuring the VLAN inside the bridge?
I think it will be very sticky to support forwarding offload for this
setup anyway:
br0
swp0.100 swp0.101 swp1.100
Need to understand what the use case is. The correct behavior IMO is for
the physical switch port to remain standalone and for the bridge to know
that the bridge port (swp0.100) is not offloaded.
FWIW I had an attempt to handle situations like this here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20210224114350.2791260-17-olteanv@xxxxxxxxx/
I will let Tobias finish with his forwarding offload patch set before
rebasing and resending mine, his work looks a lot better at this point.
