Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] bridge: vlan: combine (br|nbp)_vlan_flush into one

[Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>]

On Oct. Monday 12 (42) 09:27 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 09:15:39PM IDT, vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Oct. Monday 12 (42) 08:51 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> >> Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 02:41:09PM IDT, razor@blackwall.org wrote:
> >> >From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com>
> >> >
> >> >As Ido Schimmel pointed out the vlan_vid_del() loop in nbp_vlan_flush is
> >> >unnecessary (and is actually a remnant of the old vlan code) so we can
> >> >remove it and combine both br/nbp vlan_flush functions into one.
> >> Just a small note to Scott and Vivien:
> >> 
> >> One of the side effects of Nik's recent patchsets is that when VLANs are
> >> flushed on a port the deletion is propagated to the driver via
> >> switchdev ops, as __vlan_vid_del is called.
> >> 
> >> Therefore there is no need to do internal bookkeeping and remove VLANs
> >> yourself when port is removed from bridge.
> >
> >I was thinking about caching VLAN entries in the mv88e6xxx driver to
> >improve look up on VLAN and FDB operations, but it's a bit prematurate.
> >
> >But when VLAN are flushed, we still need to remove them from the
> >hardware table, right?
> Hi,
> 
> Not sure I'm following. You'll simply get a SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_VLAN
> (del) for each VLAN configured on the port you just removed from the bridge.
> I guess you remove them from your hardware table in the implementation
> of these ops?

Yes we do remove VLAN entries from the hardware table when
switchdev_port_obj_del(SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_VLAN) is called.

I may have misunderstood your previous note, I thought we were talking
about implementing the flush operation in switchdev drivers.

> >
> >Flushing is interesting though, most hardware have flush operations and
> >it would be interesting to have switchdev fdb_flush and vlan_flush ops.

Thanks,
-v