search for: dsa_fdb_offload_notify

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "dsa_fdb_offload_notify".

2023 Mar 27
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...swdev_notify); else err = -ENOENT; A reasonable question you could ask yourself is: why do my BR_FDB_OFFLOADED entries have this flag in the software bridge in the first place? Did I add code for it? Is it because there is some difference between mv88e6xxx and ocelot/felix, or is it because dsa_fdb_offload_notify() gets called in both cases from generic code just the same? And if dsa_fdb_offload_notify() gets called in both cases just the same, but no other driver except for mv88e6xxx emits the SWITCHDEV_FDB_DEL_TO_BRIDGE which you've patched the bridge to expect in this series, then what exactly is su...
2023 Mar 27
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...t gmail.com> wrote: > A reasonable question you could ask yourself is: why do my BR_FDB_OFFLOADED > entries have this flag in the software bridge in the first place? > Did I add code for it? Is it because there is some difference between > mv88e6xxx and ocelot/felix, or is it because dsa_fdb_offload_notify() > gets called in both cases from generic code just the same? > > And if dsa_fdb_offload_notify() gets called in both cases just the same, > but no other driver except for mv88e6xxx emits the SWITCHDEV_FDB_DEL_TO_BRIDGE > which you've patched the bridge to expect in this series,...
2023 Mar 27
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 14:52, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote: > > By the way, there is a behavior change here. > > Before: > > $ ip link add br0 type bridge && ip link set br0 up > $ ip link set swp0 master br0 && ip link set swp0 up > $ bridge fdb add dev swp0 00:01:02:03:04:05 master dynamic > [ 70.010181] mscc_felix 0000:00:00.5:
2023 Mar 28
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 01:59, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote: > > which idea is that, again? So I cannot us the offloaded flag as it is added by DSA in the common case when using 'bridge fdb replace ... dynamic'. The idea is then to use the ext_learn flag instead, which is not aged by the bridge. To do this the driver (mv88e6xxx) will send a
2023 Mar 28
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...A, and they have the potential of blocking traffic because of that. If for some reason you do think that behavior is useful and still want to keep it (I'm not sure I would), I would consider extending struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info with a "bool pls_dont_age_out", and I would make dsa_fdb_offload_notify() set this to true if the driver did actually install the dynamic FDB entry as dynamic in the ATU. > > The idea is then to use the ext_learn flag instead, which is not aged by > the bridge. To do this the driver (mv88e6xxx) will send a > SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE switchdev event whe...