Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 2/6] net: switchdev: add support for offloading of fdb locked flag

[Ido Schimmel via Bridge <bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 01:45:34PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote:
> @@ -1403,6 +1404,15 @@ int br_fdb_external_learn_add(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
>  		if (!p)
>  			flags |= BIT(BR_FDB_LOCAL);
>  
> +		if (locked)
> +			flags |= BIT(BR_FDB_ENTRY_LOCKED);
> +
> +		if (blackhole)
> +			flags |= BIT(BR_FDB_BLACKHOLE);
> +
> +		if (sticky)
> +			flags |= BIT(BR_FDB_STICKY);
> +

While reviewing the test cases it occurred to me that the else branch
(FDB entry already exists) needs modifications as well. Something like:

diff --git a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
index e7f4fccb6adb..48f842a71597 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
@@ -1397,6 +1397,21 @@ int br_fdb_external_learn_add(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
                        modified = true;
                }
 
+               if (local != test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags)) {
+                       change_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags);
+                       modified = true;
+               }
+
+               if (locked != test_bit(BR_FDB_ENTRY_LOCKED, &fdb->flags)) {
+                       change_bit(BR_FDB_ENTRY_LOCKED, &fdb->flags);
+                       modified = true;
+               }
+
+               if (blackhole != test_bit(BR_FDB_BLACKHOLE, &fdb->flags)) {
+                       change_bit(BR_FDB_BLACKHOLE, &fdb->flags);
+                       modified = true;
+               }
+
                if (swdev_notify)
                        set_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);

>  		fdb = fdb_create(br, p, addr, vid, flags);
>  		if (!fdb) {
>  			err = -ENOMEM;