[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZHydCI08zJip88rj@corigine.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2023 16:17:44 +0200
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To: Wojciech Drewek <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>
Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
alexandr.lobakin@...el.com, david.m.ertman@...el.com,
michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com, marcin.szycik@...ux.intel.com,
pawel.chmielewski@...el.com, sridhar.samudrala@...el.com,
pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de, dan.carpenter@...aro.org,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v4 07/13] ice: Switchdev FDB events support
+ Jakub, Eric
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 02:21:15PM +0200, Wojciech Drewek wrote:
> Listen for SWITCHDEV_FDB_{ADD|DEL}_TO_DEVICE events while in switchdev
> mode. Accept these events on both uplink and VF PR ports. Add HW
> rules in newly created workqueue. FDB entries are stored in rhashtable
> for lookup when removing the entry and in the list for cleanup
> purpose. Direction of the HW rule depends on the type of the ports
> on which the FDB event was received:
>
> ICE_ESWITCH_BR_UPLINK_PORT:
> TX rule that forwards the packet to the LAN (egress).
>
> ICE_ESWITCH_BR_VF_REPR_PORT:
> RX rule that forwards the packet to the VF associated
> with the port representor.
>
> In both cases the rule matches on the dst mac address.
> All the FDB entries are stored in the bridge structure.
> When the port is removed all the FDB entries associated with
> this port are removed as well. This is achieved thanks to the reference
> to the port that FDB entry holds.
>
> In the fwd rule we use only one lookup type (MAC address)
> but lkups_cnt variable is already introduced because
> we will have more lookups in the subsequent patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wojciech Drewek <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>
...
> +static void
> +ice_eswitch_br_fdb_event_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct ice_esw_br_fdb_work *fdb_work = ice_work_to_fdb_work(work);
> + bool added_by_user = fdb_work->fdb_info.added_by_user;
> + struct ice_esw_br_port *br_port = fdb_work->br_port;
> + const unsigned char *mac = fdb_work->fdb_info.addr;
> + u16 vid = fdb_work->fdb_info.vid;
> +
> + rtnl_lock();
> +
> + if (!br_port || !br_port->bridge)
> + goto err_exit;
> +
> + switch (fdb_work->event) {
> + case SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE:
> + ice_eswitch_br_fdb_entry_create(fdb_work->dev, br_port,
> + added_by_user, mac, vid);
> + break;
> + case SWITCHDEV_FDB_DEL_TO_DEVICE:
> + ice_eswitch_br_fdb_entry_find_and_delete(br_port->bridge,
> + mac, vid);
> + break;
> + default:
> + goto err_exit;
> + }
> +
> +err_exit:
> + rtnl_unlock();
> + dev_put(fdb_work->dev);
Hi Wojciech,
I notice that the CI flags this as use of a deprecated API.
So I'm wondering if it would be better written using netdev_put()
And likewise, I'm wondering if other users in the ice driver should be
updated.
> + ice_eswitch_br_fdb_work_dealloc(fdb_work);
> +}
...
> +static int
> +ice_eswitch_br_switchdev_event(struct notifier_block *nb,
> + unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> +{
> + struct net_device *dev = switchdev_notifier_info_to_dev(ptr);
> + struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info *fdb_info;
> + struct switchdev_notifier_info *info = ptr;
> + struct ice_esw_br_offloads *br_offloads;
> + struct ice_esw_br_fdb_work *work;
> + struct ice_esw_br_port *br_port;
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack;
> + struct net_device *upper;
> +
> + br_offloads = ice_nb_to_br_offloads(nb, switchdev_nb);
> + extack = switchdev_notifier_info_to_extack(ptr);
> +
> + upper = netdev_master_upper_dev_get_rcu(dev);
> + if (!upper)
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> + if (!netif_is_bridge_master(upper))
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> + if (!ice_eswitch_br_is_dev_valid(dev))
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> + br_port = ice_eswitch_br_netdev_to_port(dev);
> + if (!br_port)
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> + switch (event) {
> + case SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE:
> + case SWITCHDEV_FDB_DEL_TO_DEVICE:
> + fdb_info = container_of(info, typeof(*fdb_info), info);
> +
> + work = ice_eswitch_br_fdb_work_alloc(fdb_info, br_port, dev,
> + event);
> + if (IS_ERR(work)) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Failed to init switchdev fdb work");
> + return notifier_from_errno(PTR_ERR(work));
> + }
> + dev_hold(dev);
Likewise, I'm wondering if this should be netdev_hold().
> +
> + queue_work(br_offloads->wq, &work->work);
> + break;
> + default:
> + break;
> + }
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +}
> +
...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists