On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 07:39:34PM +0200, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Well, with this change, to have MAB working, the bridge would need learning on > of course, but how things work with the bridge according to the flags, they > should also work in the offloaded case if you ask me. There should be no > difference between the two, thus MAB in drivers would have to be with > learning on. Am I proposing for things to work differently in the offload and software case, and not realizing it? :-/ The essence of my proposal was to send a bug fix now which denies BR_LEARNING to be set together with BR_PORT_LOCKED. The fact that link-local traffic is learned by the software bridge is something unintended as far as I understand. You tried to fix it here, and as far as I could search in my inbox, that didn't go anywhere: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/47d8d747-54ef-df52-3b9c-acb9a77fa14a@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u I thought only mv88e6xxx offloads BR_PORT_LOCKED, but now, after searching, I also see prestera has support for it, so let me add Oleksandr Mazur to the discussion as well. I wonder how they deal with this? Has somebody come to rely on learning being enabled on a locked port? MAB in offloading drivers will have to be with learning on (same as in software). When BR_PORT_LOCKED | BR_LEARNING will be allowed together back in net-next (to denote the MAB configuration), offloading drivers (mv88e6xxx and prestera) will be patched to reject them. They will only accept the two together when they implement MAB support. Future drivers after this mess has been cleaned up will have to look at the BR_PORT_LOCKED and BR_LEARNING flag in combination, to see which kind of learning is desired on a port (secure, CPU based learning or autonomous learning). Am I not making sense?
