netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] Documentation: networking: Clarify switchdev devices behavior

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <357c847d-1b74-20dc-383b-2f9119d66a41@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Jan 2019 20:39:21 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Cc:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        "vivien.didelot@...il.com" <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        "nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com" <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        "roopa@...ulusnetworks.com" <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        "bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "cphealy@...il.com" <cphealy@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] Documentation: networking: Clarify switchdev
 devices behavior

Le 1/4/19 à 5:58 AM, Ido Schimmel a écrit :
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 02:47:02PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> +A switchdev driver can also refuse to support dynamic toggling of the VLAN
>> +filtering knob at runtime and require a destruction of the bridge device(s) and
>> +a creation of new bridge device(s) with a different VLAN filtering value to
>> +ensure VLAN awareness is pushed down to the HW.
> 
> ...
> 
>> +Similarly to VLAN filtering, if dynamic toggling of the IGMP snooping
> 
> I think you meant to continue this sentence with something about vetoing
> the operation. Note that it is not currently possible as
> br_mc_disabled_update() returns void. Can be extended if needed.

Yes, that's what I meant, that change is queued in my local branch right
now which will get submitted once net-next open backs again.

Thanks!
-- 
Florian