On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 06:10:22PM +0200, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Okay, I see the problem you refer to. I think that we have to accept some > limitations unless you think that just zeroing the specific port bit in the > DPV would be a better solution, and there wouldn't be caveats with that > besides having to do a FDB search etc to get the correct DPV if I am not too > mistaken. No, honestly I believe that what we should do to improve the limitation is to have proper ATU database separation between one VLAN-unaware bridge and another (i.e. what is now MV88E6XXX_FID_BRIDGED to be one FID per bridge).
