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=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=OBygPYoH9eOHMctG/tJ0Rr+r+PpqAulwebHK5F77MXU=; b=Ia7psltFGoptmW0526Vz++uGR6At0o1ULKvloYNv+OCuVIgA/EqAswUtc6HVrkzoto u4MyQU8VdPeGSuNanN4LqjudjLvopRJDKYoUsB4FRKaieWrALMWzwgHBUCUAcw/l6VM2 V7NdmLPTPmYI5HabCRYTbO3FSswzV4S/0NnJFsO4SHDE5yYahaoKhnucNKR7+cS77KcZ aHMq5rpL1AbjfSzfBYqpU9MKvnSc6xYYfb02bnc4zaeDYgTQidX3mQRDDBnx3RJV+BDw o2vrqFC2ChxQFR4ROWHFP7/KGwjNogCOG52GJosICA+X8mA6OtVl+Vk6PKRVrCpCXC5Q np+Q== From: Joachim Wiberg In-Reply-To: <586b97b3-0882-b42c-20f8-275a05b51beb@blackwall.org> References: <20220411133837.318876-1-troglobit@gmail.com> <20220411133837.318876-9-troglobit@gmail.com> <87v8ve9ppr.fsf@gmail.com> <5d597756-2fe1-e7cc-9ef3-c0323e2274f2@blackwall.org> <87pmll9xj1.fsf@gmail.com> <96bb8ff0-26d8-e9d3-e7c8-78f2abd28126@blackwall.org> <586b97b3-0882-b42c-20f8-275a05b51beb@blackwall.org> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 12:12:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87a6cp9tqw.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH RFC net-next 08/13] net: bridge: avoid classifying unknown multicast as mrouters_only List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Nikolay Aleksandrov , Roopa Prabhu Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, Vladimir Oltean , Jakub Kicinski , "David S . Miller" , Tobias Waldekranz On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 12:00, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: > On 13/04/2022 11:55, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: >> On 13/04/2022 11:51, Joachim Wiberg wrote: >>> So, if I add a bridge flag, default off as you mentioned out earlier, >>> which changes the default behavior of MCAST_FLOOD, then you'd be OK with >>> that? Something cheeky like this perhaps: >>> if (!ipv4_is_local_multicast(ip_hdr(skb)->daddr)) >>> BR_INPUT_SKB_CB(skb)->mrouters_only = !br_opt_get(br, BROPT_MCAST_FLOOD_RFC4541); >> Exactly! And that is exactly what I had in mind when I wrote it. :) Awesome, thank you! :) > Just please use a different option name that better suggests what it does. Heh, yeah spent a good while with my colleague (Tobias) thinking about how to name this one. I'll see what I can come up with, but whatever shows up in the next patch iteration will be very open for discussion. Cheers /Joachim