Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Faster ndo_fdb_dump for drivers with shared FDB

Roopa, Andrew, Florian,

On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 12:00:14AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:

I have a board where it is painfully slow to run "bridge fdb". It has 16
switch ports which are accessed over an I2C controller -> I2C mux 1 ->
I2C mux 2 -> I2C-to-SPI bridge.

It doesn't really help either that we traverse the hardware FDB of each
switch for every netdev, even though we already know all there is to
know the first time we traversed it. In fact, I hacked up some rtnetlink
and DSA changes, and with those, the time to run 'bridge fdb' on this
board decreases from 207 seconds to 26 seconds (2 FDB traversals instead
of 16), turning something intolerable into 'tolerable'.

I don't know how much we care about .ndo_fdb_dump implemented directly
by drivers (and that's where I expect this to be most useful), because
of SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE and all that. So this is RFC in case it
is helpful for somebody, at least during debugging.

Vladimir Oltean (4):
  net: rtnetlink: create a netlink cb context struct for fdb dump
  net: rtnetlink: add a minimal state machine for dumping shared FDBs
  net: dsa: implement a shared FDB dump procedure
  net: dsa: sja1105: implement shared FDB dump

 drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_main.c        |  50 +++--
 .../ethernet/freescale/dpaa2/dpaa2-switch.c   |   9 +-
 drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot.c            |   5 +-
 drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_net.c        |   4 +
 drivers/net/vxlan.c                           |   8 +-
 include/linux/rtnetlink.h                     |  25 +++
 include/net/dsa.h                             |  17 ++
 net/bridge/br_fdb.c                           |   6 +-
 net/core/rtnetlink.c                          | 105 +++++++---
 net/dsa/dsa2.c                                |   2 +
 net/dsa/dsa_priv.h                            |   1 +
 net/dsa/slave.c                               | 189 ++++++++++++++++--
 net/dsa/switch.c                              |   8 +
 13 files changed, 368 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)

-- 
2.25.1

Does something like this have any chance of being accepted?
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20210821210018.1314952-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com/