[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230327225933.plm5raegywbe7g2a@skbuf>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 01:59:33 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Hans Schultz <netdev@...io-technology.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
"maintainer:MICROCHIP KSZ SERIES ETHERNET SWITCH DRIVER"
<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>,
DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Clément Léger <clement.leger@...tlin.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:RENESAS RZ/N1 A5PSW SWITCH DRIVER"
<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" <bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards
drivers
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 11:49:58PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote:
> My first approach was to use the SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE event
> and not the SWITCHDEV_FDB_OFFLOADED event as the first would set the
> external learned flag which is not aged out by the bridge.
Link to patch? I don't see any SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE call in
either the v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230130173429.3577450-6-netdev@kapio-technology.com/
or the RFC:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230117185714.3058453-6-netdev@kapio-technology.com/
and the change log does not mention it either.
> I have at some point earlier asked why there would be two quite
> equivalent flags and what the difference between them are, but I didn't
> get a response.
Actually, the part which you are now posing as a question (what is the
difference?) was part of the premise of your earlier question (there is
no difference => why do we have both?).
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/d972e76bed896b229d9df4da81ad8eb4@kapio-technology.com/
I believe that no one answered because the question was confused and it
wasn't really clear what you were asking.
>
> Now I see the difference and that I cannot use the offloaded flag
> without changing the behaviour of the system as I actually change the
> behaviour of the offloaded flag in this version of the patch-set.
>
> So if the idea of a 'synthetically' learned fdb entry from the driver
> using the SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE event from the driver towards the
> bridge instead is accepted, I can go with that?
> (thus removing all the changes in the patch-set regarding the offloaded
> flag ofcourse)
which idea is that, again?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists