Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "swp0".
Did you mean:
swp
2023 Mar 27
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...on of the flag in net-next.
Ido, Nikolay, Roopa, Jiri, thoughts?
> +
> err = ds->ops->setup(ds);
> if (err < 0)
> goto unregister_notifier;
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: felix_fdb_add: port 0 addr 00:01:02:03:04:05 vid 0
[ 70.019105] mscc_felix 0000:00:00.5: felix_fdb_add: port 0 addr 00:01:02:03:04:05 vid 1
.... 5 minutes l...
2023 Apr 10
2
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
...ier_fdb_info
(here, BR_FDB_STATIC), we find that FDB entries were already notified to
switchdev with no regard to this flag, and thus, switchdev drivers had
no indication whether the notified entries were static or not.
For example, this command:
ip link add br0 type bridge && ip link set swp0 master br0
bridge fdb add dev swp0 00:01:02:03:04:05 master dynamic
causes a struct net_bridge_fdb_entry to be passed to
br_switchdev_fdb_notify() which has a single flag set:
BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER.
This is further passed to the switchdev notifier chain, where interested
drivers have no choice but...
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: felix_fdb_add: port 0 addr 00:01:02:03:04:05 vid 0
> [ 70.019105] mscc_felix 0000:00:00.5: felix_fdb_add: port 0 addr 00:01:02:03:04:05 vid 1
&...
2023 Apr 12
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
...TIC), we find that FDB entries were already notified to
> switchdev with no regard to this flag, and thus, switchdev drivers had
> no indication whether the notified entries were static or not.
>
> For example, this command:
>
> ip link add br0 type bridge && ip link set swp0 master br0
> bridge fdb add dev swp0 00:01:02:03:04:05 master dynamic
>
> causes a struct net_bridge_fdb_entry to be passed to
> br_switchdev_fdb_notify() which has a single flag set:
> BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER.
>
> This is further passed to the switchdev notifier chain, where in...
2023 Mar 27
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...Schultz wrote:
> 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: felix_fdb_add: port 0 addr 00:01:02:03:04:05 vid 0
> > [ 70.019105] mscc_felix 0000:00:00.5: felix_fdb_add: port 0 addr 00:01:02:0...