On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 04:57:50PM +0200, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Maybe I am just trying to understand the problem you are posing, so afaics > MAC addresses should be unique and having the same MAC address behind a > locked port and a not-locked port seems like a mis-configuration regardless > of vlan setup? As the zero-DPV entry only blocks the specific SA MAC on a > specific vlan, which is behind a locked port, there shouldn't be any > problem...? > > If the host behind a locked port starts sending on another vlan than where > it got the first locked entry, another locked entry will occur, as the > locked entries are MAC + vlan. I don't think it's an invalid configuration, I have a 17-port Marvell switch which I use as infrastructure to connect my PC with my board farm and to the Internet. I've cropped 4 out of those 17 ports for use in selftests, effectively now having 2 bridges (br0 used by the selftests and br-lan for systemd-networkd). Currently all the traffic sent and received by the selftests is done through lan1-lan4, but if I wanted to run some bridge locked port tests with traffic from my PC, what I'd do is I'd connect a (locked) port from br0 to a port from br-lan, and my PC would thus gain indirect connectivity to the locked port. Then I'd send a packet and the switch would create a locked FDB entry for my PC's MAC address, but that FDB entry would span across the entire MV88E6XXX_FID_BRIDGED, so practically speaking, it would block my PC's MAC address from doing anything, including accessing the Internet, i.e. traffic that has nothing at all to do with the locked port in br0. That isn't quite ok.
