Re: Question on DSA switches, IGMP forwarding and switchdev

[Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>]

> So yes, we can read the code here, but I'm wondering which packet types
> would then get this flag set, and which won't. Because in case of
> IGMP/MLD, the packets are in fact forwarded, but the meaning of the flag
> in skb is to prevent the skb from being forwarded further, which seems
> wrong in all cases.
> 
> I'm thinking maybe the flag should never be set?

It is a while since i did much with multicast, so please correct me
when i'm wrong...

IGMP can use different group addresses as far as i remember.
Join/leave uses the group address of interest. But query can use
224.0.0.1 or the group address.

The bridge should learn from joins, either spontaneous or as a reply
to a query. When it sees a join, it should add a multicast FDB to the
hardware for the group, so traffic is forwarded out that port.

So for real multicast traffic, we do want the flag set, the hardware
should be doing the forwarding. If we don't set the flag, we end up
with duplication when the SW bridge also forwards the multicast
traffic.

For IGMP/MLD itself, we probably need to see what the switch does. For
IGMP using the group address, does the multicast FDB rule match and
cause the hardware to forward the IGMP? If yes, then we need the flag
set, otherwise the IGMP gets duplicated. If no, then we don't want the
flag set, and leave the SW bridge to do the forwarding, or reply
itself if it is the querier.

For IGMP using 224.0.0.1, do we ever get a multicast FDB added for
that?

It sounds like you have a better test setup than i have. Can you play
with this?

6352 uses the EDSA tagger. But the same bits exist in the DSA tag,
which the 6390 uses, due to incompatibility reasons. So it would be
nice to extend both taggers.

     Thanks
	Andrew