From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62A70C433EF for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:47:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234464AbiCWKs3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2022 06:48:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57850 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233371AbiCWKs2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2022 06:48:28 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 887326E7A8; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 03:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id l20so1961294lfg.12; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 03:46:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=Pu11LzVwuByfb36IZDoOrF20LUpwOjWGCIQG1Ta8jIk=; b=Ntiazh9dgiTE4IwJgyUwQMnIG/ORs4kK1bZSFbSQydrSo/iK8bqJMWdRu/tsA3bDqG IoTMbmyQGQKSwc7re78cg6+wSgvrdWFZKBtGnE1ELpFS90Cxutl6ccSGIHp0OYvyqOuM d/BLjJwBQrtiqW4AFg99q/dh4ZEhJ5cJbdwIphqhcP4LGkjrgw5YMKVgnazbiLXpnf7E Joyliu8uqdz9KbVNSLnjKhtNvl5TCLXC2pyj449YPVK+J3D/ymqYNhR/wukKVYDsfsmS eaPCjYt4cZxsI8AiV6likmQID2ZhEISyR/JVfS/4s+cQnwyb+DJe3c+S8J5ZI9yIes4c exYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=Pu11LzVwuByfb36IZDoOrF20LUpwOjWGCIQG1Ta8jIk=; b=2vV16y727oTUvTBbJtP8DAfNzMJplcNRLzipDjLIV2EqNNWGg9gtPjkDMH31WmSv/b 9MPanzzjczwLWElqwPra41jP0JArxEtibvA2G3jdTLmdihESWIcx/+b0MuOHJRpdNtFp h6LeOtv0Zwl3z4Ier4eh6wxkX7F/N30y48Hik6WHd8UboPfkEsc/K7R9fxM8Qyem8Abs ktlOUUu9mKS0Huxuhd59DgivgT6ppSNuuXSsGXEuF05SR2afZRZ8hQpiDjKrfREEntdp s88iKH4+HPJMiXvbj+gqw0OQ6OFqx13234A8rjkrEJngyaF2LqNo9JZeaWYv93tjwVp8 oQ9A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ueGVjZ5rmYQT2KxKr7wNVepG8GH/LAuib9RuT5ouY6Q1y19SV AwJkkx3KuT3jzyyN/9J2v6A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwS+x43AwVdf/Sg4bgW4u+6IvcsrHVM8+aAaoQWmLJD4WKc4uQK5ia9Z5ZW/bb2U0c4Qv33gQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:c23:b0:44a:2c00:1a08 with SMTP id z35-20020a0565120c2300b0044a2c001a08mr10346655lfu.468.1648032416918; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 03:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wse-c0127 ([208.127.141.29]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p12-20020a056512138c00b0044833f1cd85sm2495587lfa.62.2022.03.23.03.46.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 23 Mar 2022 03:46:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Hans Schultz X-Google-Original-From: Hans Schultz To: Vladimir Oltean , Hans Schultz Cc: Andrew Lunn , davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Vivien Didelot , Florian Fainelli , Jiri Pirko , Ivan Vecera , Roopa Prabhu , Nikolay Aleksandrov , Daniel Borkmann , Ido Schimmel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: mac-auth/MAB implementation In-Reply-To: <20220323101643.kum3nuqctunakcfo@skbuf> References: <20220317161808.psftauoz5iaecduy@skbuf> <8635jg5xe5.fsf@gmail.com> <20220317172013.rhjvknre5w7mfmlo@skbuf> <86tubvk24r.fsf@gmail.com> <20220318121400.sdc4guu5m4auwoej@skbuf> <86pmmjieyl.fsf@gmail.com> <20220318131943.hc7z52beztqlzwfq@skbuf> <86a6dixnd2.fsf@gmail.com> <20220322110806.kbdb362jf6pbtqaf@skbuf> <86fsn90ye8.fsf@gmail.com> <20220323101643.kum3nuqctunakcfo@skbuf> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:46:53 +0100 Message-ID: <86h77px7xe.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On ons, mar 23, 2022 at 12:16, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:13:51AM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote: >> On tis, mar 22, 2022 at 13:08, Vladimir Oltean wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 12:01:13PM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote: >> >> On fre, mar 18, 2022 at 15:19, Vladimir Oltean wrote: >> >> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 02:10:26PM +0100, Hans Schultz wrote: >> >> >> In the offloaded case there is no difference between static and dynamic >> >> >> flags, which I see as a general issue. (The resulting ATU entry is static >> >> >> in either case.) >> >> > >> >> > It _is_ a problem. We had the same problem with the is_local bit. >> >> > Independently of this series, you can add the dynamic bit to struct >> >> > switchdev_notifier_fdb_info and make drivers reject it. >> >> > >> >> >> These FDB entries are removed when link goes down (soft or hard). The >> >> >> zero DPV entries that the new code introduces age out after 5 minutes, >> >> >> while the locked flagged FDB entries are removed by link down (thus the >> >> >> FDB and the ATU are not in sync in this case). >> >> > >> >> > Ok, so don't let them disappear from hardware, refresh them from the >> >> > driver, since user space and the bridge driver expect that they are >> >> > still there. >> >> >> >> I have now tested with two extra unmanaged switches (each connected to a >> >> seperate port on our managed switch, and when migrating from one port to >> >> another, there is member violations, but as the initial entry ages out, >> >> a new miss violation occurs and the new port adds the locked entry. In >> >> this case I only see one locked entry, either on the initial port or >> >> later on the port the host migrated to (via switch). >> >> >> >> If I refresh the ATU entries indefinitly, then this migration will for >> >> sure not work, and with the member violation suppressed, it will be >> >> silent about it. >> > >> > Manual says that migrations should trigger miss violations if configured >> > adequately, is this not the case? >> > >> >> So I don't think it is a good idea to refresh the ATU entries >> >> indefinitely. >> >> >> >> Another issue I see, is that there is a deadlock or similar issue when >> >> receiving violations and running 'bridge fdb show' (it seemed that >> >> member violations also caused this, but not sure yet...), as the unit >> >> freezes, not to return... >> > >> > Have you enabled lockdep, debug atomic sleep, detect hung tasks, things >> > like that? >> >> I have now determined that it is the rtnl_lock() that causes the >> "deadlock". The doit() in rtnetlink.c is under rtnl_lock() and is what >> takes care of getting the fdb entries when running 'bridge fdb show'. In >> principle there should be no problem with this, but I don't know if some >> interrupt queue is getting jammed as they are blocked from rtnetlink.c? > > Sorry, I forgot to respond yesterday to this. > By any chance do you maybe have an AB/BA lock inversion, where from the > ATU interrupt handler you do mv88e6xxx_reg_lock() -> rtnl_lock(), while > from the port_fdb_dump() handler you do rtnl_lock() -> mv88e6xxx_reg_lock()? Yes, I forgot that the whole handler is under mv88e6xxx_reg_lock(). I hope then that I can release the mv88e6xxx_reg_lock() before calling the handler function with issues?