Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 03/15] net: bridge: mst: Support setting and reporting MST port states
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Date: 2022-03-15 16:55:02
Also in:
bridge, lkml
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 01:25:31AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
Make it possible to change the port state in a given MSTI by extending
the bridge port netlink interface (RTM_SETLINK on PF_BRIDGE).The
proposed iproute2 interface would be:
bridge mst set dev <PORT> msti <MSTI> state <STATE>
Current states in all applicable MSTIs can also be dumped via a
corresponding RTM_GETLINK. The proposed iproute interface looks like
this:
$ bridge mst
port msti
vb1 0
state forwarding
100
state disabled
vb2 0
state forwarding
100
state forwarding
The preexisting per-VLAN states are still valid in the MST
mode (although they are read-only), and can be queried as usual if one
is interested in knowing a particular VLAN's state without having to
care about the VID to MSTI mapping (in this example VLAN 20 and 30 are
bound to MSTI 100):
$ bridge -d vlan
port vlan-id
vb1 10
state forwarding mcast_router 1
20
state disabled mcast_router 1
30
state disabled mcast_router 1
40
state forwarding mcast_router 1
vb2 10
state forwarding mcast_router 1
20
state forwarding mcast_router 1
30
state forwarding mcast_router 1
40
state forwarding mcast_router 1
Signed-off-by: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@waldekranz.com>
---
+static int br_mst_process_one(struct net_bridge_port *p,
+ const struct nlattr *attr,
+ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
+{
+ struct nlattr *tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_MST_ENTRY_MAX + 1];
+ u16 msti;
+ u8 state;
+ int err;
+
+ err = nla_parse_nested(tb, IFLA_BRIDGE_MST_ENTRY_MAX, attr,
+ br_mst_nl_policy, extack);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+
+ if (!tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_MST_ENTRY_MSTI]) {
+ NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "MSTI not specified");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ if (!tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_MST_ENTRY_STATE]) {
+ NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "State not specified");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ msti = nla_get_u16(tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_MST_ENTRY_MSTI]);
+ state = nla_get_u8(tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_MST_ENTRY_STATE]);
+
+ br_mst_set_state(p, msti, state);Is there any reason why this isn't propagating the error?
+ return 0; +}