[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <41ac7bde-9760-44db-9287-dfcc986657c6@blackwall.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 11:47:55 +0200
From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>
To: Yong Wang <yongwang@...dia.com>, roopa@...dia.com, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: aroulin@...dia.com, idosch@...dia.com, nmiyar@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] bridge: multicast: per vlan query
improvement when port or vlan state changes
On 12/21/24 00:06, Yong Wang wrote:
> The current implementation of br_multicast_enable_port() only operates on
> port's multicast context, which doesn't take into account in case of vlan
> snooping, one downside is the port's igmp query timer will NOT resume when
> port state gets changed from BR_STATE_BLOCKING to BR_STATE_FORWARDING etc.
>
> Such code flow will briefly look like:
> 1.vlan snooping
> --> br_multicast_port_query_expired with per vlan port_mcast_ctx
> --> port in BR_STATE_BLOCKING state --> then one-shot timer discontinued
>
> The port state could be changed by STP daemon or kernel STP, taking mstpd
> as example:
>
> 2.mstpd --> netlink_sendmsg --> br_setlink --> br_set_port_state with non
> blocking states, i.e. BR_STATE_LEARNING or BR_STATE_FORWARDING
> --> br_port_state_selection --> br_multicast_enable_port
> --> enable multicast with port's multicast_ctx
>
> Here for per vlan query, the port_mcast_ctx of each vlan should be used
> instead of port's multicast_ctx. The first patch corrects such behavior.
>
> Similarly, vlan state could also impact multicast behavior, the 2nd patch
> adds function to update the corresponding multicast context when vlan state
> changes.
>
>
> Yong Wang (2):
> net: bridge: multicast: re-implement port multicast enable/disable
> functions
> net: bridge: multicast: update multicast contex when vlan state gets
> changed
>
> net/bridge/br_mst.c | 4 +-
> net/bridge/br_multicast.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> net/bridge/br_private.h | 10 +++-
> 3 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
>
Hi,
It seems there will be another version (see kernel robot), can you
please add selftests that verify the new and old behaviour?
Thanks,
Nik
Powered by blists - more mailing lists