Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 3/6] drivers: net: dsa: add locked fdb entry flag to drivers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 02:34:25PM +0200, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 2022-07-08 13:56, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 11:50:33AM +0200, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
> > > On 2022-07-08 11:15, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > > When the possibility for it to be true will exist, _all_ switchdev
> > > > drivers will need to be updated to ignore that (mlxsw, cpss, ocelot,
> > > > rocker, prestera, etc etc), not just DSA. And you don't need to
> > > > propagate the is_locked flag to all individual DSA sub-drivers when none
> > > > care about is_locked in the ADD_TO_DEVICE direction, you can just ignore
> > > > within DSA until needed otherwise.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Maybe I have it wrong, but I think that Ido requested me to send it
> > > to all
> > > the drivers, and have them ignore entries with is_locked=true ...
> > 
> > I don't think Ido requested you to ignore is_locked from all DSA
> > drivers, but instead from all switchdev drivers maybe. Quite different.
> 
> So without changing the signature on port_fdb_add(). If that is to avoid
> changing that signature, which needs to be changed anyhow for any switchcore
> driver to act on it, then my next patch set will change the signarure also
> as it is needed for creating dynamic ATU entries from userspace, which is
> needed to make the whole thing complete.
> 
> As it is already done (with the is_locked to the drivers) and needed for
> future application, I would like Ido to comment on it before I take action.

It's related to my reply here [1]. AFAICT, we have two classes of device
drivers:

1. Drivers like mv88e6xxx that report locked entries to the bridge
driver via 'SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE'.

2. Drivers like mlxsw that trap packets that incurred an FDB miss to the
bridge driver. These packets will cause the bridge driver to emit
'SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE' notifications with the locked flag.

If we can agree that locked entries are only meant to signal to user
space that a certain MAC tried to gain authorization and that the bridge
should ignore them while forwarding, then there is no point in
generating the 'SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE' notifications. We should
teach the bridge driver to suppress these so that there is no need to
patch all the device drivers.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/YsqLyxTRtUjzDj6D@shredder/

> 
> > 
> > In any case I'm going to take a look at this patch set more closely and
> > run the selftest on my Marvell switch, but I can't do this today
> > unfortunately. I'll return with more comments.
> 
> Yes :-)



[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [AoE Tools]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]

  Powered by Linux