Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 21 Oct 2022 20:30:14 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     netdev@kapio-technology.com
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@linutronix.de>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@microchip.com>,
        UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@mediatek.com>,
        DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@nvidia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Yuwei Wang <wangyuweihx@gmail.com>,
        Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>,
        Florent Fourcot <florent.fourcot@wifirst.fr>,
        Hans Schultz <schultz.hans@gmail.com>,
        Joachim Wiberg <troglobit@gmail.com>,
        Amit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
        bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 10/12] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: mac-auth/MAB
 implementation
Message-ID: <20221021173014.oit3qmpkrsjwzbgu@skbuf>
References: <20221018165619.134535-11-netdev@kapio-technology.com>
 <20221018165619.134535-11-netdev@kapio-technology.com>
 <20221020132538.reirrskemcjwih2m@skbuf>
 <2565c09bb95d69142522c3c3bcaa599e@kapio-technology.com>
 <20221020225719.l5iw6vndmm7gvjo3@skbuf>
 <82d23b100b8d2c9e4647b8a134d5cbbf@kapio-technology.com>
 <20221021112216.6bw6sjrieh2znlti@skbuf>
 <7bfaae46b1913fe81654a4cd257d98b1@kapio-technology.com>
 <20221021163005.xljk2j3fkikr6uge@skbuf>
 <d1fb07de4b55d64f98425fe66156c4e4@kapio-technology.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d1fb07de4b55d64f98425fe66156c4e4@kapio-technology.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 07:18:59PM +0200, netdev@kapio-technology.com wrote:
> On 2022-10-21 18:30, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 03:16:21PM +0200, netdev@kapio-technology.com wrote:
> > > As it is now in the bridge, the locked port part is handled before learning
> > > in the ingress data path, so with BR_LEARNING and BR_PORT_LOCKED, I think it
> > > will work as it does now except link local packages.
> > 
> > If link-local learning is enabled on a locked port, I think those
> > addresses should also be learned with the BR_FDB_LOCKED flag. The
> > creation of those locked FDB entries can be further suppressed by the
> > BROPT_NO_LL_LEARN flag.
> > 
> > > If your suggestion of BR_LEARNING causing BR_FDB_LOCKED on a locked port, I
> > > guess it would be implemented under br_fdb_update() and BR_LEARNING +
> > > BR_PORT_LOCKED would go together, forcing BR_LEARNING in this case, thus also
> > > for all drivers?
> > 
> > Yes, basically where this is placed right now (in br_handle_frame_finish):
> 
> As I don't know what implications it would have for other drivers to have learning
> forced enabled on locked ports, I cannot say if it is a good idea or not.
> Right now learning is not forced either way as is, but the consensus is that learning
> should be off with locked ports, which it would be either way in the common case I
> think.

I don't think I fully understand what you mean by forcing BR_LEARNING.
A bridge port gets created with a default set of flags as can be seen in new_nbp().
Those flags include BR_LEARNING but don't include BR_PORT_LOCKED.

The user can decide he wants to make the port use 802.1X without MAB, so
he enables BR_PORT_LOCKED and disables BR_LEARNING, all with the same
netlink command (ip link set swp0 type bridge_slave learning off locked on).

How was the driver forced into anything?