On 11/29/18 9:26 AM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 03:15:46PM -0600, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >> >> >> On 11/26/18 2:07 PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 12:57:20PM -0600, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/26/18 10:26 AM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: >>>>> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 05:46:26PM -0600, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >>>>>> In dual_mac mode CPSW driver uses vid1 and vid2 by default to implement >>>>>> dual mac mode wich are used to configure pvids for each external ports. >>>>>> But, historicaly, it also adds vid0 to ALE table and sets "untag" bits for both >>>>>> ext. ports. As result, it's imposible to use priority tagged packets in >>>>>> dual mac mode. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hence, drop vid0 configuration in dual mac mode as it's not required for dual >>>>>> mac mode functionality and, this way, make it possible to use priority >>>>>> tagged packet in dual mac mode. >>>>> So, now it's enabled to be added via regular ndo. >>>>> I have similar change in mind, but was going to send it after >>>>> mcast/ucast, and - enabling same vlans patch... >>>>> >>>>> 2 things stopped me to add this: >>>>> >>>>> 1) Moving it to be enabled via regular call is Ok, but in dual mac mode >>>>> it causes overlaps, at least while vid deletion. So decided to wait till >>>>> same vlans series is applied. >>>> >>>> TI driver documentation mentions this restriction >>>> "While adding VLAN id to the eth interfaces, >>>> same VLAN id should not be added in both interfaces which will lead to VLAN >>>> forwarding and act as switch" >>> It's not accurate now. >>> This sw bug "acting like a switch" was fixed indirectly in LKML ). >>> And at least for upstream version, not TISDK, desc should be updated, >>> but better do this when it fixed completely and merged with TISDK. >>> >>> I know about this "written" restriction >>> (for tiSDK, and it's not TRM after all ...), >>> it can be avoided and it's partly avoided now ... >> >> I'd like to clarify point about supporting same VLANs in dual_mac mode, >> to avoid future misunderstanding, overall: it's *not* supported as >> adding same VLAN to both netdevices will cause unknown unicast packets >> leaking between interfaces and it can't be avoided - hw limitation. > > Simple test shows no issues with ucast leaking. > But for current buggy ucast vlan implementation it's not possible to verify, > not sure but probably leaking in your case cuased by hidden toggling of > interface to promisc while added ucast to vlans or other reason or so. > Anyway I just decided to check specifically ucasts > (macst as you know are not normal now). > > For verification you need to apply ucast fix (including vlans) first: > https://git.linaro.org/people/ivan.khoronzhuk/tsn_kernel.git/log/?h=vlan_addr_flt_fix > > This is generic fix (not sure it will be approved, need try RFC) but implement > the same as local fix for vlan ucasts: > https://git.linaro.org/people/ivan.khoronzhuk/tsn_kernel.git/log/?h=ucast_vlan_fix > > Any of those are correct. I've used generic one. > Applied the following scheme: > > +--------------------------+ > | host 74:DA:EA:47:7D:9C | > +--------------------------+ > > +---------------------+ > | am572 evm | > | eth0 eth1 | > +----------+----------+ > | eth0.400 | eth1.400 | > +----------+----------+ > ^ | > | | +-----------+ > +-----------------+ | | | PC | > | BBB eth0.400 |--------+ +->| Wireshark | > +-----------------+ +-----------+ > > > 1) Configure vlans on am572x evm > ip link add link eth0 name eth0.400 type vlan id 400 > ip link add link eth1 name eth1.400 type vlan id 400 > > 2) On BBB side: > # ip link add link eth0 name eth0.400 type vlan id 400 > Send ucast vlan traffic to the am572 evm, vlan ucast address is unreq on am572. > # ./plget -i eth0.400 -t ptpl2 -m tx-lat -n 160 -s 10 -a 74:DA:EA:47:7D:66 > # ./plget -i eth0.400 -t ptpl2 -m tx-lat -n 160 -s 10 -a 18:03:73:66:87:42 > > 3) Observe silence on PC wireshark. > > Thus, no see issues with this. > > PS: I'm sure in plget tool, you can use your own. I'm using packeth to generate udp packets (vlan) src=PC dst=unknown if there is record in ALE table which looks like: type: vlan , vid = 100, untag_force = 0x0, reg_mcast = 0x7, unreg_mcast = 0x0, member_list = 0x7 then above udp packet will be forwarded to BBB. -- regards, -grygorii
