[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1e8bc03b-4cfb-f462-a93f-b1a12a78e86e@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 15:12:43 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Jason Cobham <cobham.jason@...il.com>,
Iwan R Timmer <irtimmer@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add support for port
mirroring
On 9/19/19 2:30 PM, Jason Cobham wrote:
> Hi Iwan,
>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> I only own a simple 5 ports switch (88E6176) which has no problem of mirroring the other ports to a single port. Except for a bandwith shortage ofcourse. While I thought I checked adding and removing ports, I seemed to forgot to check removing ingress traffic as it will now >disable mirroring egress traffic. Searching for how I can distinct ingress from egress mirroring in port_mirror_del, I saw there is a variable in the mirror struct called ingress. Which seems strange, because why is it a seperate argument to the port_mirror_add function?
>>
>> Origally I planned to be able to set the egress and ingress mirror seperatly. But in my laziness when I saw there already was a function to configure the destination port this functionality was lost.
>>
>> Because the other drivers which implemented the port_mirror_add (b53 and
>> ksz9477) also lacks additional checks to prevent new mirror filters from breaking previous ones I assumed they were not necessary.
>>
>> At least I will soon sent a new version with at least the issue of removing mirror ingress traffic fixed and the ability to define a seperate ingress and egress port.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Iwan
>
> I have a similar patch set for port mirror from a few years ago. I'd
> also like to see this functionality in mainline. One issue I ran into
> is when doing port mirror in a cross-chip dsa configuration. If the
> ingress and egress ports are on different chips, the ingress chip
> needs to set the egress to the cross-chip dsa port and the cross-chip
> egress port needs to be set appropriately. I also had the
> functionality to mirror egress from a port to a destination port.
>
> Is it appropriate to send my patch to the mailing list for review or
> should we work on this off-line?
Given that the net-next tree is closed at the moment, working offline
and posting a combined version of a patch that supports port mirroring
for cross chip configurations as well as standalone sounds good to me.
Thanks!
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists