netdev - Re: [RFC 3/9] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add support for VTU ops

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 2 Jun 2015 00:44:59 -0700
From:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Jerome Oufella <jerome.oufella@...oirfairelinux.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel@...oirfairelinux.com, Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/9] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add support for VTU ops

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:

[cut]

> I brought this up before. No idea if my e-mail got lost or what happened.
>
> We use a fid per port, and a fid per bridge group. With VLANs, this is
> completely
> ignored, ahd there is only a single fid per vlan for the entire switch.
>
> Either per-port fids are unnecessary as well, or something is wrong here,
> or I am missing something. Can you explain why we only need a single fid
> per vlan, even if we have multiple bridge groups and the same vlan is
> configured in all of them ?

That brings up an interesting point about having multiple bridges with
the same vlan configured.  I struggled with that problem with rocker
also and I don't have an answer other than "don't do that".  Or,
better put, if you have multiple bridge on the same vlan, just use one
bridge for that vlan.  Otherwise, I don't know how at the device level
to partition the vlan between the bridges.  Maybe that's what Vivien
is facing also?  I can see how this works for software-only bridges,
because they should be isolated from each other and independent.  But
when offloading to a device which sees VLAN XXX global across the
entire switch, I don't see how we can preserve the bridge boundaries.

I hope I'm not misunderstanding the issue here; if I am, I apologize.

-scott
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html