Re: [PATCH net-next v5 02/14] bridge: Add vlan filtering infrastructure

[Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>]

On 01/10/2013 02:01 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> On 01/10/2013 01:36 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> This patch has some minor whitespace and spelling errors:
>>
>> WARNING: line over 80 characters
>> #429: FILE: net/bridge/br_private.h:205:
>> +static inline struct net_bridge_port *vlans_to_port(struct
>> net_port_vlans *vlans)
>>
>> ERROR: trailing whitespace
>> #432: FILE: net/bridge/br_private.h:208:
>> +       $
>>
>> WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
>> #432: FILE: net/bridge/br_private.h:208:
>> +       $
>>
>> +/* Must be protected by RTNL */
>> +static void br_vlan_del(struct net_bridge_vlan *vlan)
>>
>> +    /* Drop the self-ref to trigger descrution. */
>>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>
> sorry, will fix.  I thought I ran everything through checkpatch.  I'll
> re-run them.
>
>> Also, the data structure vlan's seems inverted. Why do you keep a hash
>> list
>> of vlan's and then a bitmap of ports. Seems more natural to just put a
>> bitmap
>> on each port that has vlan filtering rather than introducing yet
>> another list
>> to manage.
>>
>
> I originally had it this way.  I found that it wasted space and made
> other things more difficult to do.  For instance, to do egress policy, I
> would have needed another bitmap of vlans... With 4096 vlans, that's
> 512 bytes per port (1024 with policy).
>
> I could probably remove the per-port list.  It would make 2 things a
> little harder:
>    1) detecting if the port has any vlan info at all.
>    2) dumping the vlan information

One other thing would become a little more difficult.  fdb management 
for manually added neighbors.

-vlad

>
> I could pursue this if you think it'll be better.
>
> -vlad