netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] VLANs, DSA switches and multiple bridges

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: <b5edd8c7-d201-ce85-c074-fcc5c82e84fd@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:33:47 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] VLANs, DSA switches and multiple bridges

On 2/18/20 4:17 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 04:00:08PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 2/18/20 3:45 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is a repost of the previously posted RFC back in December, which
>>> did not get fully reviewed.  I've dropped the RFC tag this time as no
>>> one really found anything too problematical in the RFC posting.
>>>
>>> I've been trying to configure DSA for VLANs and not having much success.
>>> The setup is quite simple:
>>>
>>> - The main network is untagged
>>> - The wifi network is a vlan tagged with id $VN running over the main
>>>   network.
>>>
>>> I have an Armada 388 Clearfog with a PCIe wifi card which I'm trying to
>>> setup to provide wifi access to the vlan $VN network, while the switch
>>> is also part of the main network.
>>
>> Why not just revert 2ea7a679ca2abd251c1ec03f20508619707e1749 ("net: dsa:
>> Don't add vlans when vlan filtering is disabled")? If a driver wants to
>> veto the programming of VLANs while it has ports enslaved to a bridge
>> that does not have VLAN filtering, it should have enough information to
>> not do that operation.
> 
> I do not have the knowledge to know whether reverting that commit
> would be appropriate; I do not know how the non-Marvell switches will
> behave with such a revert - what was the reason for the commit in
> the first place?
> 
> The commit says:
> 
>     This fixes at least one corner case. There are still issues in other
>     corners, such as when vlan_filtering is later enabled.
> 
> but it doesn't say what that corner case was.  So, presumably reverting
> it will cause a regression of whatever that corner case was...

Andrew, can you provide more details on what prompted you to do this in
the first place?
-- 
Florian