From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06BC1C4320A for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 21:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDCFE61019 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 21:52:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232335AbhHKVxT (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Aug 2021 17:53:19 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:38659 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232166AbhHKVxR (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Aug 2021 17:53:17 -0400 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6435C00BE; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 17:52:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Aug 2021 17:52:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=FK7M9k Owfu+KZDsOKjdiQ8lyNCXWTSpz2RJWMEH8QTE=; b=myEzfllXbQ91dfcBRmK3Yi EIsoDkH8QYIvtmWI06mfJudcL/j9ABgMuHQZ3ULavzfvBITA5nKaqFbyb+yC7wZu NoEcIzQwFqIIoquw6vTg52KjbQQNXrpjLVffJ2xB9BlmaxTD9jrfP2vS2MehMPPI 8GsnpdKafi0DoMVN56gkf/E4fYfS6K2nhhsMmXi9PgU47cIlJOiCQjW4CGT8rLIM fypQcoUzK6i7wIfAzLMHAzmsf4YImpn+iJU4Hd1ryS67+WD7i9cNz/DFMnhZ/b8w skGLGNQ2PEBwVNMBIgMUOR7zwjZKKbgVvqCHqfqu8DB7msNEPpOvSpFw/08a1qKw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrkedvgddtvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepkfguohcuufgt hhhimhhmvghluceoihguohhstghhsehiughoshgthhdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnheptdffkeekfeduffevgeeujeffjefhtefgueeugfevtdeiheduueeukefhudehleet necuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepihguoh hstghhsehiughoshgthhdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 17:52:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 00:52:48 +0300 From: Ido Schimmel To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: DENG Qingfang , Roopa Prabhu , Nikolay Aleksandrov , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , "moderated list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" , "open list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" , open list , Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: bridge: switchdev: allow port isolation to be offloaded Message-ID: References: <20210811135247.1703496-1-dqfext@gmail.com> <20210811214506.4pf5t3wgabs5blqj@skbuf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210811214506.4pf5t3wgabs5blqj@skbuf> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:45:06AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:38:56AM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 09:52:46PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote: > > > Add BR_ISOLATED flag to BR_PORT_FLAGS_HW_OFFLOAD, to allow switchdev > > > drivers to offload port isolation. > > > > > > Suggested-by: Vladimir Oltean > > > Signed-off-by: DENG Qingfang > > > --- > > > net/bridge/br_switchdev.c | 3 ++- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c > > > index 6bf518d78f02..898257153883 100644 > > > --- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c > > > +++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c > > > @@ -71,7 +71,8 @@ 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 | \ > > > - BR_MCAST_FLOOD | BR_BCAST_FLOOD) > > > + BR_MCAST_FLOOD | BR_BCAST_FLOOD | \ > > > + BR_ISOLATED) > > > > Why add it now and not as part of a patchset that actually makes use of > > the flag in a driver that offloads port isolation? > > The way the information got transmitted is a bit unfortunate. > > Making BR_ISOLATED part of BR_PORT_FLAGS_HW_OFFLOAD is a matter of > correctness when switchdev offloads the data path. Since this feature > will not work correctly without driver intervention, it makes sense that > drivers should reject it currently, which is exactly what this patch > accomplishes - it makes the code path go through the > SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS driver handlers, which return > -EINVAL for everything they don't recognize. If the purpose is correctness, then this is not the only flag that was missed. BR_HAIRPIN_MODE is also relevant for the data path, for example. Anyway, the commit message needs to be reworded to reflect the true purpose of the patch. > > (yes, we do still have a problem for drivers that don't catch > SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS at all, switchdev will return > -EOPNOTSUPP for those which is then ignored, but those are in the > minority)