lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 net-next 1/6] net: bridge: add locked entry fdb flag to extend locked port feature
On 2022-08-29 09:52, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 12:23:30PM +0200, netdev@kapio-technology.com
> wrote:
>> On 2022-08-27 17:19, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 01:45:33PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote:
>> > >
>> > > nbp_switchdev_frame_mark(p, skb);
>> > > @@ -943,6 +946,10 @@ static int br_setport(struct net_bridge_port
>> > > *p, struct nlattr *tb[],
>> > > br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_NEIGH_SUPPRESS,
>> > > BR_NEIGH_SUPPRESS);
>> > > br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_ISOLATED, BR_ISOLATED);
>> > > br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_LOCKED, BR_PORT_LOCKED);
>> > > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_MAB, BR_PORT_MAB);
>> > > +
>> > > + if (!(p->flags & BR_PORT_LOCKED))
>> > > + p->flags &= ~BR_PORT_MAB;
>>
>> The reason for this is that I wanted it to be so that if you have MAB
>> enabled (and locked of course) and unlock the port, it will
>> automatically
>> clear both flags instead of having to first disable MAB and then
>> unlock the
>> port.
>
> User space can just do:
>
> # bridge link set dev swp1 locked off mab off
>
> I prefer not to push such logic into the kernel and instead fail
> explicitly. I won't argue if more people are in favor.

I shall do it as you suggest. It sounds fair. :-)

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-29 10:05    [W:0.106 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site