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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <FFEDCF9956066D4D97C463CC178C7F69F23676@SJEXCHMB06.corp.ad.broadcom.com> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:20:43 +0000 From: Viswanath Bandaru <vbandaru@...adcom.com> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> CC: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>, "sfeldma@...il.com" <sfeldma@...il.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>, "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>, "gospo@...ulusnetworks.com" <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>, "siva.mannem.lnx@...il.com" <siva.mannem.lnx@...il.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next RFC 0/5] Add NTF_EXT_AGED to control FDB ageing in SW or HW > -----Original Message----- > From: Jiri Pirko [mailto:jiri@...nulli.us] > Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2015 9:20 PM > To: Viswanath Bandaru > Cc: Florian Fainelli; roopa; sfeldma@...il.com; netdev@...r.kernel.org; > linux@...ck-us.net; andrew@...n.ch; gospo@...ulusnetworks.com; > siva.mannem.lnx@...il.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 0/5] Add NTF_EXT_AGED to control FDB > ageing in SW or HW > > Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:29:38PM CET, vbandaru@...adcom.com wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > > >> >I agree, in fact, most of the HW I have access to only has a global > >> >age timer configuration knob. Is this configurable on a per-port > >> >basis for higher end switches, or even maybe per-FDB entry? > >> > >> I'm currently not aware of any hw which does not have global age timer. > >> But I believe that they will appear. The model that we have now, to > >> propagate aging setting of bridge down is more general and should be ok. > >> > >> Drivers should probably take care of multi bridge setup with > >> different aging setup. Maybe to find minimal time and print a warning? > >> > > > >Setting up the minimal time in such a scenario is good. > > > >Should we also consider the possibility bridges containing ports from > different devices (and therefore different drivers) ? If that is a possibility, I > think the bridge module should take responsibility of finding out the minimal > time to pushing to all involved drivers. > > It is certainly possible to bridge ports from multiple switch devices. > But that should not be a problem, because 1 bridge has 1 aging setup which > will be passed to all port drivers. I apologize for confusion, I actually meant multiple bridge devices (which was the context) each having ports from different switch devices. Is this expected to be expected in reality ? > > I believe that the only case which need to be resolved is multiple bridges > over single switch device. And I believe that it should be handled in drivers > because only drivers know what the hw is capable of (if it supports aging > setup per port/bridge/global). > > > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists