netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add support for bridge flags

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: <20190219140444.GD16594@t480s.localdomain>
Date:   Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:04:44 -0500
From:   Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add support for
 bridge flags

Hi Russell,

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 18:08:11 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> Having these as separate functions means that we would then need
> additional complexity in mv88e6xxx to store the per-port flooding state,
> so we can do this:
> 
>         reg &= ~MV88E6352_PORT_CTL0_EGRESS_FLOODS_MASK;
> 
>         if (unicast && multicast)
>                 reg |= MV88E6352_PORT_CTL0_EGRESS_FLOODS_ALL_UNKNOWN_DA;
>         else if (unicast)
>                 reg |= MV88E6352_PORT_CTL0_EGRESS_FLOODS_NO_UNKNOWN_MC_DA;
>         else if (multicast)
>                 reg |= MV88E6352_PORT_CTL0_EGRESS_FLOODS_NO_UNKNOWN_UC_DA;
>         else
>                 reg |= MV88E6352_PORT_CTL0_EGRESS_FLOODS_NO_UNKNOWN_DA;
> 
> for some of the switches.  It looks to me like mv88e6xxx would prefer
> having at least both the unicast and multicast flags together.
> 
> Even without that, it means more code in mv88e6xxx to wrap each of
> these calls between the DSA ops and the chip specific ops...

True, let's stick with ops->port_egress_flood(ds, port, bool uc, bool mc).
I do not think that it is necessary to add support for BR_BCAST_FLOOD yet,
we can extend this routine later if we need to.

Your dsa_port_bridge_flags() core function can notify the understood
features. This will allow us to scope the support of the bridge flags in
the core, and preventing the drivers to do that themselves.


Thanks,

	Vivien