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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 15:46:26 +0300
From:   Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
CC:     Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
        Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>,
        Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: build all switchdev drivers as modules when
 the bridge is a module



On 03/08/2021 15:33, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 1:58 PM Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 02:18:38PM +0300, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>> In my opinion, the problem is a bit bigger here than just fixing the build :(
>>>
>>> In case, of ^cpsw the switchdev mode is kinda optional and in many cases
>>> (especially for testing purposes, NFS) the multi-mac mode is still preferable mode.
>>>
>>> There were no such tight dependency between switchdev drivers and bridge core before and switchdev serviced as
>>> independent, notification based layer between them, so ^cpsw still can be "Y" and bridge can be "M".
>>> Now for mostly every kernel build configuration the CONFIG_BRIDGE will need to be set as "Y", or we will have
>>> to update drivers to support build with BRIDGE=n and maintain separate builds for networking vs non-networking testing.
>>> But is this enough? Wouldn't it cause 'chain reaction' required to add more and more "Y" options (like CONFIG_VLAN_8021Q)?
>>>
>>> PS. Just to be sure we on the same page - ARM builds will be forced (with this patch) to have CONFIG_TI_CPSW_SWITCHDEV=m
>>> and so all our automation testing will just fail with omap2plus_defconfig.
>>
>> I didn't realize it is such a big use case to have the bridge built as
>> module and cpsw as built-in.
> 
> I don't think anybody realistically cares about doing, I was only interested in
> correctly expressing what the dependency is.
> 
>> I will send a patch that converts the
>> switchdev_bridge_port_{,un}offload functions to simply emit a blocking
>> switchdev notifier which the bridge processes (a la SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE),
>> therefore making switchdev and the bridge loosely coupled in order to
>> keep your setup the way it was before.
> 
> That does sounds like it can avoid future build regressions, and simplify the
> Kconfig dependencies, so that would probably be a good solution.

Yes. it sounds good, thank you.
Just a thought - might be good to follow switchdev_attr approach (extendable), but in the opposite direction as, I feel,
more notification dev->bridge might be added in the future.

-- 
Best regards,
grygorii

Powered by blists - more mailing lists