From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blackwall-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jLhgLLgTKtoWPjtFp8qSJCOCQYPPUCR4lznJBFvpJ40=; b=U2/PO1uNjGw4COGMRK/7YnRCnLhzHnfNDU3fAZ5Gx+P/GW9LrdqG3I45ITG643pzdb JG96C8RFIxHaJo6jdq6DH8J0mqrH0Bz1LFAyLJSsLa4UaZpclulO0L4GHi+89g9+1pnR HDM6h3Y5186RpYH4+PvFGvDR2Ik+oyncwi5oGmQCSvo+gPTdzOt12QXk6cniH/TCtech Vq3liKmSG0Xman0T2LN3WT0Wj/eUgaio4p3CEkzLOQrTkoGzCA/fMFr6AeOL1HJpIUZ2 C0wbKaR6CbkPBGYPA6Dz6XgoxKgg/nkvNXlWjX0lgXr+zdmUXLKioQVm/Tf/NW942v7j a/3A== Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 12:33:34 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-US References: <20220524152144.40527-1-schultz.hans+netdev@gmail.com> <20220524152144.40527-2-schultz.hans+netdev@gmail.com> <86sfov2w8k.fsf@gmail.com> <86sfoqgi5e.fsf@gmail.com> <86y1yfzap3.fsf@gmail.com> From: Nikolay Aleksandrov In-Reply-To: <86y1yfzap3.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH V3 net-next 1/4] net: bridge: add fdb flag to extent locked port feature List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Hans Schultz , Ido Schimmel Cc: Ivan Vecera , Andrew Lunn , Florian Fainelli , Jiri Pirko , Daniel Borkmann , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vivien Didelot , Ido Schimmel , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Roopa Prabhu , kuba@kernel.org, Vladimir Oltean , Shuah Khan , davem@davemloft.net On 02/06/2022 12:17, Hans Schultz wrote: > On tis, maj 31, 2022 at 17:23, Ido Schimmel wrote: >> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:34:21AM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote: >>>> Just to give you another data point about how this works in other >>>> devices, I can say that at least in Spectrum this works a bit >>>> differently. Packets that ingress via a locked port and incur an FDB >>>> miss are trapped to the CPU where they should be injected into the Rx >>>> path so that the bridge will create the 'locked' FDB entry and notify it >>>> to user space. The packets are obviously rated limited as the CPU cannot >>>> handle billions of packets per second, unlike the ASIC. The limit is not >>>> per bridge port (or even per bridge), but instead global to the entire >>>> device. >>> >>> Btw, will the bridge not create a SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE event >>> towards the switchcore in the scheme you mention and thus add an entry >>> that opens up for the specified mac address? >> >> It will, but the driver needs to ignore FDB entries that are notified >> with locked flag. I see that you extended 'struct >> switchdev_notifier_fdb_info' with the locked flag, but it's not >> initialized in br_switchdev_fdb_populate(). Can you add it in the next >> version? > > An issue with sending the flag to the driver is that port_fdb_add() is > suddenly getting more and more arguments and getting messy in my > opinion, but maybe that's just how it is... > > Another issue is that > bridge fdb add MAC dev DEV master static > seems to add the entry with the SELF flag set, which I don't think is > what we would want it to do or? I don't see such thing (hacked iproute2 to print the flags before cmd): $ bridge fdb add 00:11:22:33:44:55 dev vnet110 master static flags 0x4 0x4 = NTF_MASTER only > Also the replace command is not really supported properly as it is. I > have made a fix for that which looks something like this: > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c > index 6cbb27e3b976..f43aa204f375 100644 > --- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c > +++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c > @@ -917,6 +917,9 @@ static int fdb_add_entry(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *source, > if (flags & NLM_F_EXCL) > return -EEXIST; > > + if (flags & NLM_F_REPLACE) > + modified = true; > + > if (READ_ONCE(fdb->dst) != source) { > WRITE_ONCE(fdb->dst, source); > modified = true; > > The argument for always sending notifications to the driver in the case > of replace is that a replace command will refresh the entries timeout if > the entry is the same. Any thoughts on this? I don't think so. It always updates its "used" timer, not its "updated" timer which is the one for expire. A replace that doesn't actually change anything on the entry shouldn't generate a notification.