On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 12:59:54AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 01:08, Vladimir Oltean [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 11:46:45PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 18:18, Vladimir Oltean [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 05:05:35PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 12:35, Vladimir Oltean [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 09:54:34AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+	if (!dsa_port_can_configure_learning(dp) || dp->learning) {
+		switch (state->state) {
+		case BR_STATE_DISABLED:
+		case BR_STATE_BLOCKING:
+		case BR_STATE_LISTENING:
+			/* Ideally we would only fast age entries
+			 * belonging to VLANs controlled by this
+			 * MST.
+			 */
+			dsa_port_fast_age(dp);

Does mv88e6xxx support this? If it does, you might just as well
introduce another variant of ds->ops->port_fast_age() for an msti.

You can limit ATU operations to a particular FID. So the way I see it we
could either have:

int (*port_vlan_fast_age)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, u16 vid)

+ Maybe more generic. You could imagine there being a way to trigger
  this operation from userspace for example.
- We would have to keep the VLAN<->MSTI mapping in the DSA layer in
  order to be able to do the fan-out in dsa_port_set_mst_state.

or:

int (*port_msti_fast_age)(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, u16 msti)

+ Let's the mapping be an internal affair in the driver.
- Perhaps, less generically useful.

Which one do you prefer? Or is there a hidden third option? :)

Yes, I was thinking of "port_msti_fast_age". I don't see a cheap way of
keeping VLAN to MSTI associations in the DSA layer. Only if we could
retrieve this mapping from the bridge layer - maybe with something
analogous to br_vlan_get_info(), but br_mst_get_info(), and this gets
passed a VLAN_N_VID sized bitmap, which the bridge populates with ones
and zeroes.

That can easily be done. Given that, should we go for port_vlan_fast_age
instead? port_msti_fast_age feels like an awkward interface, since I
don't think there is any hardware out there that can actually perform
that operation without internally fanning it out over all affected VIDs
(or FIDs in the case of mv88e6xxx).

Yup, yup. My previous email was all over the place with regard to the
available options, because I wrote it in multiple phases so it wasn't
chronologically ordered top-to-bottom. But port_vlan_fast_age() makes
the most sense if you can implement br_mst_get_info(). Same goes for
dsa_port_notify_bridge_fdb_flush().

quoted

quoted

The reason why I asked for this is because I'm not sure of the
implications of flushing the entire FDB of the port for a single MSTP
state change. It would trigger temporary useless flooding in other MSTIs
at the very least. There isn't any backwards compatibility concern to
speak of, so we can at least try from the beginning to limit the
flushing to the required VLANs.

Aside from the performance implications of flows being temporarily
flooded I don't think there are any.

I suppose if you've disabled flooding of unknown unicast on that port,
you would loose the flow until you see some return traffic (or when one
side gives up and ARPs). While somewhat esoteric, it would be nice to
handle this case if the hardware supports it.

If by "handle this case" you mean "flush only the affected VLANs", then
yes, I fully agree.

quoted

quoted

What I didn't think about, and will be a problem, is
dsa_port_notify_bridge_fdb_flush() - we don't know the vid to flush.
The easy way out here would be to export dsa_port_notify_bridge_fdb_flush(),
add a "vid" argument to it, and let drivers call it. Thoughts?

To me, this seems to be another argument in favor of
port_vlan_fast_age. That way you would know the VIDs being flushed at
the DSA layer, and driver writers needn't concern themselves with having
to remember to generate the proper notifications back to the bridge.

See above.

quoted

quoted

Alternatively, if you think that cross-flushing FDBs of multiple MSTIs
isn't a real problem, I suppose we could keep the "port_fast_age" method.

What about falling back to it if the driver doesn't support per-VLAN
flushing? Flushing all entries will work in most cases, at the cost of
some temporary flooding. Seems more useful than refusing the offload
completely.

So here's what I don't understand. Do you expect a driver other than
mv88e6xxx to do something remotely reasonable under a bridge with MSTP
enabled? The idea being to handle gracefully the case where a port is
BLOCKING in an MSTI but FORWARDING in another. Because if not, let's
just outright not offload that kind of bridge, and only concern
ourselves with what MST-capable drivers can do.

I think you're right. I was trying to make it easier for other driver
writers, but it will just be more confusing and error prone.

Alright, so v3 will have something like this:

bool dsa_port_can_offload_mst(struct dsa_port *dp)
{
	return ds->ops->vlan_msti_set &&
		ds->ops->port_mst_state_set &&
		ds->ops->port_vlan_fast_age &&
		dsa_port_can_configure_learning(dp);
}

If this returns false, we have two options:

1. Return -EOPNOTSUPP, which the bridge will be unable to discriminate
   from a non-switchdev port saying "I have no idea what you're talking
   about". I.e. the bridge will happily apply the config, but the
   hardware won't match. I don't like this, but it lines up with most
   other stuff.

2. Return a hard error, e.g. -EINVAL/-ENOSYS. This will keep the bridge
   in sync with the hardware and also gives some feedback to the
   user. This seems like the better approach to me, but it is a new kind
   of paradigm.

What do you think?

Wait, what? It matters a lot where you place the call to
dsa_port_can_offload_mst(), too. You don't have to propagate a hard
error code, either, at least if you make dsa_port_bridge_join() return
-EOPNOTSUPP prior to calling switchdev_bridge_port_offload(), no?
DSA transforms this error code into 0, and dsa_port_offloads_bridge*()
starts returning false, which makes us ignore all MSTP related switchdev
notifiers.

Right. So we also need:

1. A br_mst_enabled() that we can call from dsa_port_bridge_join to
   validate the initial state.

2. A switchdev attr event sent out when enabling/disabling MST on the
   bridge, so that we can NAK the change.

So far, so good. This, to me, is analogous to the way in which a hypothetical
VLAN-unaware switchdev driver wouldn't deny VLAN additions or removals,
but it would only accept a VLAN-unaware bridge, and refuse to transition
into a VLAN-aware one. So even though we wouldn't deny the bridge from
keeping state that would have effect when VLAN awareness is on, we
would just deny the bridge from making that state active. Same with MSTP
awareness in my view - don't deny MSTI migrations, per-MSTI port state
changes etc, just the ability to turn on MSTP awareness.

In practice I have only seen things done the other way around - the
dpaa2-switch driver refuses VLAN-unaware bridges, so it doesn't need to
handle ignoring VLAN switchdev notifiers - a slightly simpler task.
Also, the concept of unoffloaded uppers seems to be pretty unique to DSA
so far, among switchdev drivers.

quoted

The important part will be to make sure that MSTP is enabled for this
bridge from the get-go (that being the only case in which we can offload
an MSTP aware bridge), and refusing to offload dynamic changes to its
MSTP state. I didn't re-check now, but I think I remember there being

Hang on though. Won't that mean that this sequence...

ip link add dev br0 type bridge \
    vlan_filtering 1 vlan_default_pvid 0 mst_enable 1
ip link set dev swp1 master br0

...will work, but offloading will be disabled on swp0; whereas this
sequence...

ip link add dev br0 type bridge \
    vlan_filtering 1 vlan_default_pvid 0
ip link set dev swp1 master br0
ip link set dev br0 type bridge mst_enable 1

...will fail on the final command? Even though they are logically
equivalent? But maybe that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

Well, they could be made equivalent for academic purposes, if you're
prepared to dynamically unoffload a bridge port from the MST awareness
notifier, be my guest, I never tried it... I suppose we could try it, in
theory it's just a call to dsa_port_pre_bridge_leave() +
dsa_port_bridge_leave() after all. But it's effort to be spent in work
and testing, and I'm not sure whether anyone will see the benefit or use
case. During initial bridge join, at least it's an established code
path, the drivers which don't implement ds->ops->port_bridge_join() have
exercised it. Alvin Šipraga has fixed a few bugs related to rtl8365mb
and this after some recent rework, it should work just fine now.

quoted

limitations even in the software bridge related to dynamic MSTP mode
changes anyway - there had to not be any port VLANs, which IIUC means
that you actually need to _delete_ the port PVIDs which are automatically
created before you could change the MSTP mode.

There are some ergonomic issues there, yes. I might look at it again and
see if there is some reasonable way of allowing the mode to be changed
even when VLANs are present.

quoted

This is the model, what's wrong with it? I said "don't offload the
bridge", not "don't offload specific MSTP operations".

Nothing is wrong, I just couldn't see the whole picture.

This is the way.