[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a22642aa-63a2-e492-5f64-b344c62d0142@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:33:25 +0300
From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
To: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
Cc: roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
jiri@...nulli.us, ivecera@...hat.com, andrew@...n.ch,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 12/12] net: bridge: Add port attribute
IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_IN_OPEN
On 14/07/2020 18:07, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> The 07/14/2020 16:29, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>
>> On 14/07/2020 10:34, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
>>> This patch adds a new port attribute, IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_IN_OPEN, which
>>> allows to notify the userspace when the node lost the contiuity of
>>> MRP_InTest frames.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/uapi/linux/if_link.h | 1 +
>>> net/bridge/br_netlink.c | 3 +++
>>> tools/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h | 1 +
>>> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>
> Hi Nik,
>
>>
>> It's kind of late by now, but I'd wish these were contained in a nested MRP attribute. :)
>> Horatiu, do you expect to have many more MRP attributes outside of MRP netlink code?
>
> I don't expect to add any other MRP attributes outside of MRP netlink
> code.
>
>>
>> Perhaps we should at least dump them only for MRP-aware ports, that should be easy.
>> They make no sense outside of MRP anyway, but increase the size of the dump for all
>> right now.
>
> You are right. Then should I first send a fix on the net for this and
> after that I will fix these patches or just fix this in the next patch
> series?
>
IMO it's more of an improvement rather than a bug, but since you don't expect to have more
attributes outside of MRP's netlink I guess we can drop it for now. Up to you.
It definitely shouldn't block this patch-set.
>>
>> Acked-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
>>
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h b/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
>>> index cc185a007ade8..26842ffd0501d 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
>>> @@ -344,6 +344,7 @@ enum {
>>> IFLA_BRPORT_ISOLATED,
>>> IFLA_BRPORT_BACKUP_PORT,
>>> IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_RING_OPEN,
>>> + IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_IN_OPEN,
>>> __IFLA_BRPORT_MAX
>>> };
>>> #define IFLA_BRPORT_MAX (__IFLA_BRPORT_MAX - 1)
>>> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_netlink.c
>>> index c532fa65c9834..147d52596e174 100644
>>> --- a/net/bridge/br_netlink.c
>>> +++ b/net/bridge/br_netlink.c
>>> @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ static inline size_t br_port_info_size(void)
>>> #endif
>>> + nla_total_size(sizeof(u16)) /* IFLA_BRPORT_GROUP_FWD_MASK */
>>> + nla_total_size(sizeof(u8)) /* IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_RING_OPEN */
>>> + + nla_total_size(sizeof(u8)) /* IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_IN_OPEN */
>>> + 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -216,6 +217,8 @@ static int br_port_fill_attrs(struct sk_buff *skb,
>>> !!(p->flags & BR_NEIGH_SUPPRESS)) ||
>>> nla_put_u8(skb, IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_RING_OPEN, !!(p->flags &
>>> BR_MRP_LOST_CONT)) ||
>>> + nla_put_u8(skb, IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_IN_OPEN,
>>> + !!(p->flags & BR_MRP_LOST_IN_CONT)) ||
>>> nla_put_u8(skb, IFLA_BRPORT_ISOLATED, !!(p->flags & BR_ISOLATED)))
>>> return -EMSGSIZE;
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
>>> index cafedbbfefbe9..781e482dc499f 100644
>>> --- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
>>> +++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
>>> @@ -344,6 +344,7 @@ enum {
>>> IFLA_BRPORT_ISOLATED,
>>> IFLA_BRPORT_BACKUP_PORT,
>>> IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_RING_OPEN,
>>> + IFLA_BRPORT_MRP_IN_OPEN,
>>> __IFLA_BRPORT_MAX
>>> };
>>> #define IFLA_BRPORT_MAX (__IFLA_BRPORT_MAX - 1)
>>>
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists