On 2022-10-31 15:43, Ido Schimmel wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 11:09:31PM +0100, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
On 2022-10-25 12:00, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> @@ -943,6 +946,14 @@ static int br_setport(struct net_bridge_port *p,
> struct nlattr *tb[],
> br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_NEIGH_SUPPRESS,
> BR_NEIGH_SUPPRESS);
> br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_ISOLATED, BR_ISOLATED);
> br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_LOCKED, BR_PORT_LOCKED);
> + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_MAB, BR_PORT_MAB);
> +
> + if ((p->flags & BR_PORT_MAB) &&
> + (!(p->flags & BR_PORT_LOCKED) || !(p->flags & BR_LEARNING))) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "MAB can only be enabled on a locked port
> with learning enabled");
It's a bit odd to get this message when turning off learning on a port
with
MAB on, e.g....
# bridge link set dev a2 learning off
Error: MAB can only be enabled on a locked port with learning enabled.
It's better if you suggest something else. How about:
"Bridge port must be locked and have learning enabled when MAB is
enabled"
?
Yes, I think that is better in case it should not be split into more
than one
message. At least it is not bound to a specific action.
