linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: do not purge a VTU entry

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:   Wed, 07 Jun 2017 15:59:15 -0400
From:   Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: do not purge a VTU entry

Hi Florian,

Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> writes:

> On 06/06/2017 01:56 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>> The mv88e6xxx driver currently tries to be smart and remove by itself a
>> VLAN entry from the VTU when the driven switch sees no user ports as
>> members of the VLAN.
>> 
>> This is bad in a multi-chip switch fabric, since a chip in between
>> others may have no bridge port members, but still needs to be aware of
>> the VID in order to correctly pass frames in the data path.
>> 
>> Remove the code purging a VTU entry when updating a port membership.
>
> In that case the switch sitting between two other chips and passing
> traffic would still have at least two of its DSA ports be part of a VTU
> entry, right?

That is correct.

>
> So could not we just do ....
>
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 15 +--------------
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 14 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
>> index 522f023bb17e..64c0f88f9e79 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c
>> @@ -1325,9 +1325,8 @@ static void mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_add(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>>  static int _mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_del(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
>>  				    int port, u16 vid)
>>  {
>> -	struct dsa_switch *ds = chip->ds;
>>  	struct mv88e6xxx_vtu_entry vlan;
>> -	int i, err;
>> +	int err;
>>  
>>  	err = mv88e6xxx_vtu_get(chip, vid, &vlan, false);
>>  	if (err)
>> @@ -1339,18 +1338,6 @@ static int _mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_del(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip,
>>  
>>  	vlan.member[port] = GLOBAL_VTU_DATA_MEMBER_TAG_NON_MEMBER;
>>  
>> -	/* keep the VLAN unless all ports are excluded */
>> -	vlan.valid = false;
>> -	for (i = 0; i < mv88e6xxx_num_ports(chip); ++i) {
>> -		if (dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, i) || dsa_is_dsa_port(ds, i))
>> -			continue;
>
> ... break the loop here?

I can remove only the dsa_is_{cpu,dsa}_port condition above, this will
make the code ready for when the DSA core will remove VLAN on DSA ports.

Thanks!

        Vivien