From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 8CFFB823F6 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org C0A9F81CAD MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 10:55:15 +0200 From: netdev@kapio-technology.com In-Reply-To: References: <20220826114538.705433-1-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <20220826114538.705433-7-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <7654860e4d7d43c15d482c6caeb6a773@kapio-technology.com> Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH v5 net-next 6/6] selftests: forwarding: add test of MAC-Auth Bypass to locked port tests List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ido Schimmel Cc: Andrew Lunn , Alexandre Belloni , Nikolay Aleksandrov , Kurt Kanzenbach , Eric Dumazet , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , Ivan Vecera , Florian Fainelli , Daniel Borkmann , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Roopa Prabhu , kuba@kernel.org, Paolo Abeni , Vivien Didelot , Woojung Huh , Landen Chao , Jiri Pirko , Christian Marangi , Hauke Mehrtens , Sean Wang , DENG Qingfang , Claudiu Manoil , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Matthias Brugger , Yuwei Wang , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Vladimir Oltean , davem@davemloft.net On 2022-08-29 09:40, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 02:00:29PM +0200, netdev@kapio-technology.com > wrote: >> On 2022-08-27 20:21, Ido Schimmel wrote: >> > "locked on learning on" is counter intuitive and IMO very much a >> > misconfiguration that we should have disallowed when the "locked" option >> > was introduced. It is my understanding that the only reason we are even >> > talking about it is because mv88e6xxx needs it for MAB for some reason. >> >> As the way mv88e6xxx implements "learning off" is to remove port >> association >> for ingress packets on a port, but that breaks many other things such >> as >> refreshing ATU entries and violation interrupts, so it is needed and >> the >> question is then what is the worst to have 'learning on' on a locked >> port or >> to have the locked port enabling learning in the driver silently? >> >> Opinions seem to differ. Note that even on locked ports without MAB, >> port >> association on ingress is still needed in future as I have a dynamic >> ATU >> patch set coming, that uses age out violation and hardware refreshing >> to let >> the hardware keep the dynamic entries as long as the authorized >> station is >> sending, but will age the entry out if the station keeps silent for >> the >> ageing time. But that patch set is dependent on this patch set, and I >> don't >> think I can send it before this is accepted... > > # bridge link set dev swp1 learning on locked on > # bridge link set dev swp2 learning on locked on As we must think in how most drivers work, which I am not knowledgeable of, I think that it is probably the best to think of the way mv88e6xxx works as an outlier. If that is true, then I think the best option is to go with: #bridge link set dev $swp1 learning off locked on #bridge link set dev $swp2 learning off locked on Then the cleanup side will just be: #bridge link set dev $swp1 locked off #bridge link set dev $swp2 locked off The state 'learning off' is then consistent with the behavior of both the bridge and driver after the cleanup.