From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=KGZCltwDEuDtdVSTj/+aDb5ZKdS2bNxeO6n+gHL1s2Q=; b=VQmoFj/1OxbLjhEevHycJOV96wtzwVXDTG8oDW9GtUIQIVolXMvxMqn+JKbmzg8hd1 uboUfIWYCacKNsgCMye9OjMf+c6fg4zVFW2qML6XY8eTLCyjNIj0gvrmEKN9TYH/A5Ip OkPKKd8oNJ+i3gIYzubWAPs/m+CWZF0zP0RqeonRNd4n7HBde2w4cJYTlHg+OxjIK1Uj q2kXuknsBXmmjOPwp5lH20phuj8WowouMTSzS/A3/ssA0nxWxG1x5CRwdRSqEGE5QT8o zAw5QnbhiMssMF5Nh7Mw31r99GtNiIpZvS3R8WVXV+btUgxowO/mki0j/TQbiMuqfx1f MwcA== Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 13:09:59 +0200 From: Vladimir Oltean Message-ID: <20220324110959.t4hqale35qbrakdu@skbuf> References: <20220317093902.1305816-1-schultz.hans+netdev@gmail.com> <20220317093902.1305816-3-schultz.hans+netdev@gmail.com> <86o81whmwv.fsf@gmail.com> <20220323123534.i2whyau3doq2xdxg@skbuf> <86wngkbzqb.fsf@gmail.com> <20220323144304.4uqst3hapvzg3ej6@skbuf> <86lewzej4n.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86lewzej4n.fsf@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/4] net: switchdev: add support for offloading of fdb locked flag List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Hans Schultz Cc: Ivan Vecera , Andrew Lunn , Florian Fainelli , Jiri Pirko , Daniel Borkmann , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Nikolay Aleksandrov , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vivien Didelot , Ido Schimmel , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Roopa Prabhu , kuba@kernel.org, Shuah Khan , davem@davemloft.net On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:32:08AM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote: > On ons, mar 23, 2022 at 16:43, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 01:49:32PM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote: > >> >> Does someone have an idea why there at this point is no option to add a > >> >> dynamic fdb entry? > >> >> > >> >> The fdb added entries here do not age out, while the ATU entries do > >> >> (after 5 min), resulting in unsynced ATU vs fdb. > >> > > >> > I think the expectation is to use br_fdb_external_learn_del() if the > >> > externally learned entry expires. The bridge should not age by itself > >> > FDB entries learned externally. > >> > > >> > >> It seems to me that something is missing then? > >> My tests using trafgen that I gave a report on to Lunn generated massive > >> amounts of fdb entries, but after a while the ATU was clean and the fdb > >> was still full of random entries... > > > > I'm no longer sure where you are, sorry.. > > I think we discussed that you need to enable ATU age interrupts in order > > to keep the ATU in sync with the bridge FDB? Which means either to > > delete the locked FDB entries from the bridge when they age out in the > > ATU, or to keep refreshing locked ATU entries. > > So it seems that you're doing neither of those 2 things if you end up > > with bridge FDB entries which are no longer in the ATU. > > Any idea why G2 offset 5 ATUAgeIntEn (bit 10) is set? There is no define > for it, so I assume it is something default? No idea, but I can confirm that the out-of-reset value I see for MV88E6XXX_G2_SWITCH_MGMT on 6190 and 6390 is 0x400. It's best not to rely on any reset defaults though.