On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 12:54:39AM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote: > Sorry, forgot to reply... I added a patch (see below) to the offload > set. If the bridge patches are accepted and we have disagreements on the > offload part I can always split out this patch and send it separately so > that mv88e6xxx rejects MAB in 6.2. > > commit ebdd7363f8c1802af63c35f74d6922b727617a7d > Author: Ido Schimmel <idosch@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon Oct 31 19:36:36 2022 +0200 > > bridge: switchdev: Reflect MAB bridge port flag to device drivers > > Reflect the 'BR_PORT_MAB' flag to device drivers so that: > > * Drivers that support MAB could act upon the flag being toggled. > * Drivers that do not support MAB will prevent MAB from being enabled. > > Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Notes: > v1: > * New patch. > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c > index 8a0abe35137d..7eb6fd5bb917 100644 > --- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c > +++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c > @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ bool nbp_switchdev_allowed_egress(const struct net_bridge_port *p, > } > > /* Flags that can be offloaded to hardware */ > -#define BR_PORT_FLAGS_HW_OFFLOAD (BR_LEARNING | BR_FLOOD | \ > +#define BR_PORT_FLAGS_HW_OFFLOAD (BR_LEARNING | BR_FLOOD | BR_PORT_MAB | \ > BR_MCAST_FLOOD | BR_BCAST_FLOOD | BR_PORT_LOCKED | \ > BR_HAIRPIN_MODE | BR_ISOLATED | BR_MULTICAST_TO_UNICAST) Yeah, ok, normally the feature would be gated until it really works on existing offloading drivers, but I suppose a compromise from 100% correctness could be made if you say you're going to send the offload bits right away.
