From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f49.google.com (mail-ej1-f49.google.com [209.85.218.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30D7F41168C for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 08:55:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.49 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789376113; cv=none; b=b2X7kIKPJoyaviw9ahKlW6gfwEDrJJDxOD0vPWFLUmVuDyQzQDJP300bNLwT2D7+BCqqVbvFCAioVcu2sXq3fz3jHS9aVlZHtZbCVtgx+2tPdgzw+iUM3RNYpPYQDAdZbwlT0DK9jN5lOPSaywdJr75rFdyZ/A8qr6/NEIgJHhw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789376113; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IJyCKllunMMUhHfcw5OmNX0Wc6uDfl1qnkLw0LwVxg8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=J7SzKpfkFHmrcCIz8ylDU8uSg+ITBjzzTLURTuyaW/sbcc8bddR3ZmwenVJYr5HT/mkHVriErIHkrR4E5Sz5GWLa7GEyYhy60oy0zqXoqoRoCj7PikCnpHTdnjpE6kAb4GFGHXsh5C/4caPnzjS8RG0Uu6F9OKwJTVbUrznFMX8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=hIE+KBPP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.49 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="hIE+KBPP" Received: by mail-ej1-f49.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-c20ce3c118aso352495066b.0 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 01:55:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1789376103; x=1789980903; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=kSgf3ABCS/HTHGlHUul3ahtWnU5PdY9A7nkvg16f/yg=; b=hIE+KBPPhdEtOZDttXXUbe02zyH5ZknVMZevD7PD21w6gKD3wXKg+iG1MnRP15I2np XFA2lReGJyUBMeNUvQYiCV8v4grojvR7s4FodM5DYC0IAf2STFj+c1fEztUZW72OwQJh VZ6ib/7nOWupEZlVdyHkOtPT+z5BAjvHlsnuUgCVJBPbJP8jGjB3MGIQ0H5kxCwrmvS8 La5JT+A7PrcnZillujtbpzEvV+VqJNTRxikd8AciOUDQ4spYGFZpYnmMd2cesMpgXssb 2dYEoDVpwsbW9e0MWa4G8tSsTErPbbLy+YxPrWij3x5jEvuztC01V7Lv+9Q0AUPAjMW5 2CzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1789376103; x=1789980903; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=kSgf3ABCS/HTHGlHUul3ahtWnU5PdY9A7nkvg16f/yg=; b=S+UbYsYiktFZ5DOocLtMWS0Q35fL6RTQflrZMK5FSmC60l3ZuNR5FKKBOVxBE4uakB VZMgCg9g9I/2Mf8KAM9TWjrbNpAUEtGRRv8aR7FMlz2ZYVjtj8epyaFBY3+6jgVyZwBe bOTfhl0pg7YriytdbNyKUXyTEbOP75IidATcXOEmsRIiNY3CfqAMz5xuQ9Upx+D14Pyl 4Do87qnAkjxvtjs3/j6Z9Zc1zdcy84cntvSsac6220hydxSUrkSdbqzc/dVjD9MUiwAD LfLEweJAXymbOjBjaiO3ymDZTmd7wUxoj9RtBZPlEOZr6dvdpT4wiEfTsuqSp6ZLj5Ka dukg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBxnzK7lIzLmPKggrqL/C6bR2Wlb+5jAtub5qR6wFeHQji2fTet3lY5Quc5RPJZHbozBf3cPbvQ=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++n2sACdM2LCDzFYrPFXiXtAFBoHSb0Mf8l8gaBCyodNqookYHSM cESNGSseIhYroVPU8sm8bKbXy8gFtJuKjmiZU2SpBHvP77gLAcv2BVKL X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou1Aqf1QtmGseb+IP+0USgSv2ivQPvvacFH5vRW1b50RbfSj/h/PY0osh/iwGzA 68I6wcfJzsL3WnveoSv0OnROuycEkxwhcHM7PKo6J3OoJUt0TVOxzx+EdhNs19HsMEO59tUhqy2 Bj8LdWcy2iV1H30BllKvKhnyKU2dax28TboWybrJ0YkicrQCUHxTbvaA6IhFacGErPF7kIPXXdK JcYgXr35pjBPEMHKpDC90WQ/sQknCrnHhdtYDLa6nLVhJ1DEErY56q1mKi9GA3koJunO62Hv2g+ 9mhNNgbfd4mwFglZi9n285GXdP/ypGtwyfpQoGwFbkbYZUZcEXX0a0e3F5/fYkr+GT88ujAUlVC P2jk8x/dweEQfmpmgHFQi3czYRPGMfsTnf12VtYtse+CCA+C5Mx67dzcNNsQLN869wbkgLkpnYD 3YsvSrna7gqSLsgHZIpy7xcea7YFC09ayTG6O9S5EPR8bCOWzq29mpha7yhkTOV8oijxu+RveXl An/U5U6YUUE1Z9sauTPzfuPj0BNK0gPA22LlRg7+uQre+MUWl1qrDqXiMaVZOiRExbd X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:970c:b0:c25:5a26:3787 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-c29a42f1e2dmr277217366b.8.1789376102419; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 01:55:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BERSOARE-M-K4D5.cisco.com ([2603:5004:20a0:100c:4701:1ac4:1c21:4a1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-c29ad3e033asm101378466b.47.2026.09.14.01.55.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 bits=256/256); Mon, 14 Sep 2026 01:55:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Bernardo Soares X-Google-Original-From: Bernardo Soares To: Mark Bloch Cc: Daniel Borkmann , netdev@vger.kernel.org, saeedm@nvidia.com, Vlad Buslov , Bernardo Soares Subject: [PATCH net v2 3/3] net/mlx5: Bridge, don't fail unlink of untracked/unsupported peer ports Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 09:54:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20260914085430.18694-4-bersoare@isovalent.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.50.1 In-Reply-To: <20260914085430.18694-1-bersoare@isovalent.com> References: <20260914085430.18694-1-bersoare@isovalent.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_unlink() returns -EINVAL when the port isn't tracked by this instance's br_offloads, which is reachable in two legitimate cases: a replayed/duplicate NETDEV_CHANGEUPPER unlink for a port already cleaned up, or a peer-port unlink for a vport whose link was never created because peer_link() skipped it. Return 0 instead in both cases, and give mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_peer_unlink() the same merged_eswitch capability guard peer_link() already has. This also matters beyond the -EINVAL itself: mlx5_esw_bridge_switchdev_port_event() runs on the per-netns netdev_chain, and notifier_from_errno(-EINVAL) sets NOTIFY_STOP_MASK, which call_netdevice_notifiers_info() checks to skip the global chain entirely - so the old -EINVAL silently dropped the event for every other listener on the system, including a sibling PF's own bridge-offload instance, even though none of it was visible to user space since __netdev_upper_dev_unlink() discards the return value. Fixes: c358ea1741bc ("net/mlx5: Bridge, allow merged eswitch connectivity") Signed-off-by: Bernardo Soares --- v2: new patch, addresses review comment on v1 asking whether the peer unlink path also needed changes. mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_peer_unlink() now mirrors mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_peer_link()'s merged_eswitch capability guard, and mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_unlink() treats an already-absent/untracked port as a no-op (return 0) instead of -EINVAL, which is reachable on a replayed or duplicate NETDEV_CHANGEUPPER unlink and was found while auditing the same code for the ownership-check gap raised on v1. --- drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/bridge.c | 9 +++++---- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/bridge.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/bridge.c index ac90ccda1272..b4cf3c5ac0dd 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/bridge.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/esw/bridge.c @@ -1649,10 +1649,8 @@ int mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_unlink(struct net_device *br_netdev, u16 vport_num, int err; port = mlx5_esw_bridge_port_lookup(vport_num, esw_owner_vhca_id, br_offloads); - if (!port) { - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Port is not attached to any bridge"); - return -EINVAL; - } + if (!port) + return 0; if (port->bridge->ifindex != br_netdev->ifindex) { NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Port is attached to another bridge"); return -EINVAL; @@ -1682,6 +1680,9 @@ int mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_peer_unlink(struct net_device *br_netdev, u16 vport_nu struct mlx5_esw_bridge_offloads *br_offloads, struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) { + if (!MLX5_CAP_ESW(br_offloads->esw->dev, merged_eswitch)) + return 0; + return mlx5_esw_bridge_vport_unlink(br_netdev, vport_num, esw_owner_vhca_id, br_offloads, extack); } -- 2.43.0