netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v7 8/9] net: lan966x: Extend switchdev bridge flags

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: <20211217174000.febeewxdio6dbmb6@skbuf>
Date:   Fri, 17 Dec 2021 17:40:00 +0000
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "vivien.didelot@...il.com" <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 8/9] net: lan966x: Extend switchdev bridge
 flags

On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 04:53:52PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> Currently allow a port to be part or not of the multicast flooding mask.
> By implementing the switchdev calls SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS
> and SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
> ---
>  .../microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c     | 34 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c
> index cef9e690fb82..af227b33cb3f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_switchdev.c
> @@ -9,6 +9,34 @@ static struct notifier_block lan966x_netdevice_nb __read_mostly;
>  static struct notifier_block lan966x_switchdev_nb __read_mostly;
>  static struct notifier_block lan966x_switchdev_blocking_nb __read_mostly;
>  
> +static void lan966x_port_bridge_flags(struct lan966x_port *port,
> +				      struct switchdev_brport_flags flags)
> +{
> +	u32 val = lan_rd(port->lan966x, ANA_PGID(PGID_MC));
> +
> +	val = ANA_PGID_PGID_GET(val);

Ideally you'd want to read PGID_MC only if you know that BR_MCAST_FLOOD
is the flag getting changed. Otherwise you'd have to refactor this when
you add support for more brport flags.

> +
> +	if (flags.mask & BR_MCAST_FLOOD) {
> +		if (flags.val & BR_MCAST_FLOOD)
> +			val |= BIT(port->chip_port);
> +		else
> +			val &= ~BIT(port->chip_port);
> +	}
> +
> +	lan_rmw(ANA_PGID_PGID_SET(val),
> +		ANA_PGID_PGID,
> +		port->lan966x, ANA_PGID(PGID_MC));
> +}
> +
> +static int lan966x_port_pre_bridge_flags(struct lan966x_port *port,
> +					 struct switchdev_brport_flags flags)
> +{
> +	if (flags.mask & ~BR_MCAST_FLOOD)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static void lan966x_update_fwd_mask(struct lan966x *lan966x)
>  {
>  	int i;
> @@ -67,6 +95,12 @@ static int lan966x_port_attr_set(struct net_device *dev, const void *ctx,
>  		return 0;
>  
>  	switch (attr->id) {
> +	case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_BRIDGE_FLAGS:
> +		lan966x_port_bridge_flags(port, attr->u.brport_flags);
> +		break;
> +	case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PRE_BRIDGE_FLAGS:
> +		err = lan966x_port_pre_bridge_flags(port, attr->u.brport_flags);
> +		break;
>  	case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_STP_STATE:
>  		lan966x_port_stp_state_set(port, attr->u.stp_state);
>  		break;
> -- 
> 2.33.0
>