netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/10] net: bridge: add document for IFLA

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: <86124486-3290-4507-8158-57eaf5bbb8a4@lunn.ch>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2023 19:21:25 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
	Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Marc Muehlfeld <mmuehlfe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/10] net: bridge: add document for IFLA_BR enum

On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 06:46:25PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 05:31:36PM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > + * @IFLA_BR_MAX_AGE
> > + *   The hello packet timeout, is the time until another bridge in the
> 
> No comma between subject and predicate.
> 
> > + *   spanning tree is assumed to be dead, after reception of its last hello
> > + *   message. Only relevant if STP is enabled.
> > + *
> > + *   The valid values are between (6 * USER_HZ) and (40 * USER_HZ).
> > + *   The default value is (20 * USER_HZ).
> > + *
> > + * @IFLA_BR_GROUP_FWD_MASK
> > + *   The group forward mask. This is the bitmask that is applied to
> > + *   decide whether to forward incoming frames destined to link-local
> > + *   addresses. The addresses of the form is 01:80:C2:00:00:0X, which
> > + *   means the bridge does not forward any link-local frames coming on
> > + *   this port).
> > + *
> > + *   The default value is 0.

Where was the default value of 0 derived from?

br_handle_frame() seems to handle 01-80-C2-00-00-00 using is used for
BPDUs. 01-80-C2-00-00-01 is explicitly dropped, since its Pause, which
i doubt you want to forward. LLDP has some level of processing.

Should the default value reflect this?

       Andrew