Re: [Patch v2 net-next 3/3] net: bridge: mcast: Notify on mdb offload failure

On 4/4/25 23:11, Joseph Huang wrote:

On 4/4/2025 4:04 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:

quoted

On 4/4/25 18:25, Joseph Huang wrote:

quoted

On 4/4/2025 6:29 AM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:

quoted

On 4/4/25 02:44, Joseph Huang wrote:

quoted

Notify user space on mdb offload failure if mdb_offload_fail_notification
is set.

Signed-off-by: Joseph Huang <redacted>
---
   net/bridge/br_mdb.c       | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
   net/bridge/br_private.h   |  9 +++++++++
   net/bridge/br_switchdev.c |  4 ++++
   3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

The patch looks good, but one question - it seems we'll mark mdb entries with
"offload failed" when we get -EOPNOTSUPP as an error as well. Is that intended?

That is, if the option is enabled and we have mixed bridge ports, we'll mark mdbs
to the non-switch ports as offload failed, but it is not due to a switch offload
error.

Good catch. No, that was not intended.

What if we short-circuit and just return like you'd suggested initially if err == -EOPNOTSUPP?

quoted

quoted

diff --git a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
index 40f0b16e4df8..9b5005d0742a 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c

@@ -504,6 +504,7 @@ static void br_switchdev_mdb_complete(struct net_device *dev, int err, void *pri

       struct net_bridge_mdb_entry *mp;
       struct net_bridge_port *port = data->port;
       struct net_bridge *br = port->br;
+    u8 old_flags;
   

+    if (err == -EOPNOTSUPP)
+        goto notsupp;

quoted

quoted

       spin_lock_bh(&br->multicast_lock);
       mp = br_mdb_ip_get(br, &data->ip);

@@ -514,7 +515,10 @@ static void br_switchdev_mdb_complete(struct net_device *dev, int err, void *pri

           if (p->key.port != port)
               continue;
   +        old_flags = p->flags;
           br_multicast_set_pg_offload_flags(p, !err);
+        if (br_mdb_should_notify(br, old_flags ^ p->flags))
+            br_mdb_flag_change_notify(br->dev, mp, p);
       }
   out:
       spin_unlock_bh(&br->multicast_lock);

+ notsupp:
     kfree(priv);

Looks good to me. Thanks!

Thanks for the review!

And a logistic question. Now that part 1 and part 2 are ack'd (thanks again for the review), when I send out v3, should I resend those (unmodified part 1 and part 2) with my v3 patch series, or should I break this one off and only send part 3 v3 as a separate patch?

Thanks,
Joseph

You should send the whole set again as v3, but you should keep the acked-by tags in those patches.

Cheers,
 Nik