netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 2/7] net: dsa: Add DSA driver for Hirschmann Hellcreek switches

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: <20201016154336.s2acp5auctn2zzis@skbuf>
Date:   Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:43:36 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        Kamil Alkhouri <kamil.alkhouri@...offenburg.de>,
        ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 2/7] net: dsa: Add DSA driver for Hirschmann
 Hellcreek switches

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 02:11:06PM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> When VLAN awareness is disabled, the packet is still classified with the
> pvid. But, later all rules regarding VLANs (except for the PCP field)
> are ignored then. So, the programmed pvid doesn't matter in this case.

Ok, clear now.

> The only way to implement the non-filtering bridge behavior is this
> flag. However, this has some more implications. For instance when
> there's a non filtering bridge, then standalone mode doesn't work
> anymore due to the VLAN unawareness. This is not a problem at the
> moment, because there are only two ports. But, later when there are more
> ports, then having two ports in a non-filtering bridge and one in
> standalone mode doesn't work. That's another limitation that needs to be
> considered when adding more ports later on.

Well, then you have feedback to bring to the hardware engineers when
switches with more than 2 user ports will be instantiated.

> Besides that problem everything else seem to work now in accordance to
> the expected Linux behavior with roper restrictions in place.

Ok, that's great.