netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 01/14] net: mscc: ocelot: allow offloading of bridge on top of LAG

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: <20210116172623.2277b86a@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Sat, 16 Jan 2021 17:26:23 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>,
        Maxim Kochetkov <fido_max@...ox.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 01/14] net: mscc: ocelot: allow offloading
 of bridge on top of LAG

On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 02:59:30 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> 
> Commit 7afb3e575e5a ("net: mscc: ocelot: don't handle netdev events for
> other netdevs") was too aggressive, and it made ocelot_netdevice_event
> react only to network interface events emitted for the ocelot switch
> ports.
> 
> In fact, only the PRECHANGEUPPER should have had that check.
> 
> When we ignore all events that are not for us, we miss the fact that the
> upper of the LAG changes, and the bonding interface gets enslaved to a
> bridge. This is an operation we could offload under certain conditions.

I see the commit in question is in net, perhaps worth spelling out why
this is not a fix? Perhaps add some "in the future" to the last
sentence if it's the case that this will only matter with the following
patches applied?