On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 02:04:10PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:58:33AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:52:48AM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > > > > > If the purpose is correctness, then this is not the only flag that was > > > missed. BR_HAIRPIN_MODE is also relevant for the data path, for example. > > > > I never wanted to suggest that I'm giving a comprehensive answer, I just > > answered Qingfang's punctual question here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CALW65jbotyW0MSOd-bd1TH_mkiBWhhRCQ29jgn+d12rXdj2pZA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Tobias also pointed out the same issue about BR_MULTICAST_TO_UNICAST in > > conjunction with tx_fwd_offload (although the same is probably true even > > without it): > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20210426170411.1789186-1-tobias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > Anyway, the commit message needs to be reworded to reflect the true > > > purpose of the patch. > > > > Agree, and potentially extended with all the bridge port flags which are > > broken without switchdev driver intervention. > > So, what else flags should be added to BR_PORT_FLAGS_HW_OFFLOAD? I can't think of others beside these 3, BR_ISOLATED, BR_HAIRPIN_MODE and BR_MULTICAST_TO_UNICAST.
