[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201101150442.as7qfa2qh7figmsn@skbuf>
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 17:04:42 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>, vyasevich@...il.com,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 00/13] RX filtering for DSA switches
On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 04:42:17PM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> If the goal of this thread is to get packet sockets to work with
> offloaded traffic, then I think you need to teach these sockets to
> instruct the bound device to trap / mirror incoming traffic to the CPU.
> Maybe via a new ndo.
A new ndo that does what? It would be exclusively called by sockets?
We have packet traps with tc, packet traps with devlink, a mechanism for
switchdev host MDBs, and from the discussion with you I also gather that
there should be an equivalent switchdev object for host FDBs, that the
bridge would use. So we would need yet another mechanism to extract
packets from the hardware data path? I am simply lacking the clarity
about what the new ndo you're talking about should do.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists