[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <VI1PR0402MB28007254BB7614477CED4DBCE07E0@VI1PR0402MB2800.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:31:35 +0000
From: Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 06/12] staging: dpaa2-ethsw: add ACL entry to redirect STP
to CPU
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] staging: dpaa2-ethsw: add ACL entry to redirect
> STP to CPU
>
> > +static int ethsw_port_set_ctrl_if_acl(struct ethsw_port_priv
> > +*port_priv) {
> > + const char stp_mac[ETH_ALEN] = {0x01, 0x80, 0xC2, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00};
>
> I think there is a standard define for that somewhere in include/linux or
> maybe include/net.
>
> But thinking about the big picture, i wonder why this is needed, at least in a
> minimal implementation. Bit 0 is set in this MAC address, so it is a L2 multicast
> frame. By default, all L2 multicast frames should be delivered to the CPU. So
> it should work without this.
>
> Andrew
Now I see that I should have been more clear about what our switch can do.
The control queues do not form an actual interface in the sense that the CPU does not receive unknown unicast, broadcast and multicast frames by default.
For each frame that we want to direct to the CPU we must add an ACL entry.
Ioana
Powered by blists - more mailing lists