On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 09:30:09PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 02:25:10AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote: > > Some switchdev drivers, notably DSA, ignore all dynamically learned > > address notifications (!added_by_user) as these are autonomously added > > by the switch. Previously, such a notification was indistinguishable > > from a local address notification. Include a local bit in the > > notification so that the two classes can be discriminated. > > > > This allows DSA-like devices to add local addresses to the hardware > > FDB (with the CPU as the destination), thereby avoiding flows towards > > the CPU being flooded by the switch as unknown unicast. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tobias Waldekranz <tob...@waldekranz.com> > > --- > > In an ideal world, the BR_FDB_LOCAL bit of an FDB entry is what you > would probably want to use as an indication that the packet must be > delivered upstream by the hardware, considering that this is what the > software data path does: > > br_handle_frame_finish: > if (test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &dst->flags)) > return br_pass_frame_up(skb); > > However, we are not in an ideal world, but in a cacophony of nonsensical > flags that must be passed to the 'bridge fdb add' command. For example, > I noticed this usage pattern in your patch 6/7:
Thanks for adding me. Reflecting FDB flags is a very much needed change. I will take a look tomorrow or the day after.
