netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] switchdev: update documentation for offload_fwd

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: <CAE4R7bDf=ZZgv+4KHCLOkQjxWYmF8P7oo1_2rUkpnYnguZJQuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jul 2015 22:57:09 -0700
From:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
To:	Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Cc:	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiří Pírko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] switchdev: update documentation for offload_fwd_mark

On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 04:16:43PM -0700, sfeldma@...il.com wrote:
>> From: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt |   14 ++++++++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt b/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt
>> index c5d7ade..b864e47 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt
>> @@ -279,8 +279,18 @@ and unknown unicast packets to all ports in domain, if allowed by port's
>>  current STP state.  The switch driver, knowing which ports are within which
>>  vlan L2 domain, can program the switch device for flooding.  The packet should
>>  also be sent to the port netdev for processing by the bridge driver.  The
>> -bridge should not reflood the packet to the same ports the device flooded.
>> -XXX: the mechanism to avoid duplicate flood packets is being discuseed.
>> +bridge should not reflood the packet to the same ports the device flooded,
>> +otherwise there will be duplicate packets on the wire.
>> +
>> +To avoid duplicate packets, the device/driver can mark a packet as already
>
> I wonder if  'should' or 'may' would be clearer than 'can'.

'should' sounds better; v2.
--
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