linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 12/15] net: dsa: Handle MST state changes

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]

Message-ID: <20220316130256.3hgbllxioz4igxen@skbuf>
Date:   Wed, 16 Mar 2022 15:02:56 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>,
        Matt Johnston <matt@...econstruct.com.au>,
        Cooper Lees <me@...perlees.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 12/15] net: dsa: Handle MST state changes

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 10:51:17AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> > Question though:
> >
> >>> +			err = dsa_port_msti_fast_age(dp, state->msti);
> >
> > If _msti_fast_age returns an error here, do we want that to bubble up to
> > the bridge? It seems more important to keep the bridge in sync with the
> > hardware. I.e. the hardware state has already been successfully synced,
> > we just weren't able to flush all VLANs for some reason. We could revert
> > the state I guess, but what if that fails?
> >
> > Should we settle for a log message?
> 
> Or should we set the extack message? Similar to how we report software
> fallback of bridging/LAGs?

A warning extack and chug along sounds great. The worst that can happen
if flushing a VLAN's FDB fails is that the topology will reconverge slower.