On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:48:53 -0800, Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On 1/17/19 8:36 AM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> > Hi Florian,
> >
> > On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 12:00:51 -0800, Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> + /* Handle the case were multiple bridges span the same switch device
> >> + * and one of them has a different setting than what is being requested
> >> + * which would be breaking filtering semantics for any of the other
> >> + * bridge devices.
> >> + */
> >> + b53_for_each_port(dev, i) {
> >> + bridge_dev = dsa_to_port(ds, i)->bridge_dev;
> >> + if (bridge_dev &&
> >> + bridge_dev != dsa_to_port(ds, port)->bridge_dev &&
> >> + br_vlan_enabled(bridge_dev) != vlan_filtering) {
> >> + netdev_err(bridge_dev,
> >> + "VLAN filtering is global to the switch!\n");
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >
> > Unbridged ports must act as standard NICs and thus forward taggued frames.
> > What happens to them if there's a bridge with VLAN filtering enabled spawned
> > on other ports of your switch? Will the unbridged ports filter VLAN?
> Because VLAN filtering a global setting to the switch, unbridged network
> ports will effectively have VLAN filtering enabled, which is why the
> ndo_vlan_rx_{add,kill}_vid functions to permit that use case.
But then vlan_filtering must simply not be allowed on your switch if you
have unbridged ports, no?
I might be mixing things up here but I don't understand yet how you can
have bridged and unbridged ports working correctly on your switch when it
has global VLAN filtering turned on. I understand that the switch will drop
the tagged frames on ingress.
Thanks,
Vivien
