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 1583EC433F5 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 22:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231417AbhLIW4V (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:56:21 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41516 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229957AbhLIW4U (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2021 17:56:20 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x135.google.com (mail-lf1-x135.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::135]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89E09C061746 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 14:52:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x135.google.com with SMTP id z7so14803249lfi.11 for ; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:52:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=waldekranz-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=aBAmz2mfae10zTo+mGux5mBIceBhW4rtqbo7ov9BQFw=; b=eS7SzJf30odlBsRM6JtjUXNtPo+CFvgs6vGiGE2Q7oF7MvduXVWBWx4hqR482z13ut vI3BxAwBTPAd5S/SDR5tsTKTIvyLXrJqEsex+YVsSAXxQ1vAAGw0WZZOl/1QqfVpby1a 6jT388GPLPNzoLtQitrRPOonGFf5Pmw/AGwIXQJ65DLTDZdo9nLC9SNA9HNnlIde97kb 0yV5Sq5BaoNTxTHlTa5aKxsi6cG1ppY3Xkpk2IRta7DfzUE00tApWJI2ZxJQQLx4WcaJ vJzd+2rDhmwoUIsiV1ADbhUU6LnsdIGgbhhmklalmjZzuueA85lrllpjsS6IGWnW/IDv sLjA== 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=aBAmz2mfae10zTo+mGux5mBIceBhW4rtqbo7ov9BQFw=; b=j36A/PXIizSe+WNiM/8hmTcxQL4Wweju/TXLIqAkPvQL+HdVaIaF9n4w9P73Vhl7Tu ektwYm0nQCoDj8tzl955MuE5SvMTvPeeoKS+v/1+SWMwbDUgwZnQjFmPU0nodjLjNE1X CIDq9XzPB6yZxm99tNyHZxrkWlGvfBeSrMjcLcAUakOXcPrV9ldItgMzKTCFAxmgCPeF RR88blgkAvKcQqe2W0UWjybqiMq0fGMxuc50rmO2rGt5rmHMFPEFjaxvT/dNygNkIZxb jCyWPxw9aoSslcrLZEQBQpYpqtfk3dygax6ZUml0lcDaHjkjrCrhj1wCyAbgre+4o2Wc SxaA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533BuA2uxUeNJyN89EM33Xm1d0cBY8CPI686W4usqN5EUoQzbXpL QEr+uzehFoUiuID25C0fbxnbTRPf5kjY/g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxtu1SwkQS1ACe+bR1Dpg4RsxwS84twwNUEgpoVev4r+MFkZAgijzLnzC53sdyCcEzvg1TghA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:6d3:: with SMTP id u19mr8579091lff.453.1639090364546; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:52:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from wkz-x280 (h-212-85-90-115.A259.priv.bahnhof.se. [212.85.90.115]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o15sm129051lfk.175.2021.12.09.14.52.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:52:44 -0800 (PST) From: Tobias Waldekranz To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, andrew@lunn.ch, vivien.didelot@gmail.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add tx fwd offload PVT on intermediate devices In-Reply-To: <20211209224146.gfldu66kqmkgcg54@skbuf> References: <20211209222424.124791-1-tobias@waldekranz.com> <20211209224146.gfldu66kqmkgcg54@skbuf> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 23:52:42 +0100 Message-ID: <871r2l2xxh.fsf@waldekranz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 00:41, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 11:24:24PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote: >> In a typical mv88e6xxx switch tree like this: >> >> CPU >> | .----. >> .--0--. | .--0--. >> | sw0 | | | sw1 | >> '-1-2-' | '-1-2-' >> '---' >> >> If sw1p{1,2} are added to a bridge that sw0p1 is not a part of, sw0 >> still needs to add a crosschip PVT entry for the virtual DSA device >> assigned to represent the bridge. >> >> Fixes: ce5df6894a57 ("net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: map virtual bridges with forwarding offload in the PVT") >> Signed-off-by: Tobias Waldekranz >> --- > > This makes sense. Sorry, my Turris MOX has 3 cascaded switches but I > only test it using a single bridge that spans all of the ports. > So this is why in my case the DSA and CPU ports could receive packets > using the virtual bridge device, because mv88e6xxx_port_vlan() had been > called on them through the direct mv88e6xxx_port_bridge_join(), not > through mv88e6xxx_crosschip_bridge_join(). Yeah this is by far the most common setup, that's why I missed it as well. > I guess you have a use case > where some leaf ports are in a bridge but some upstream ports aren't, > and this is how you caught this? I've been doing some work on running kselftest-like tests on a multichip mv88e6xxx system. In that process, I discovered this issue along with a whole slew of other nasty things related to isolation of standalone ports. I am finalizing a series to tackle that which (while not exactly elegant) should get the job done. Stay tuned :)