Hi Jonas,

El lun, 2 jun 2025 a las 22:08, Jonas Gorski
([off-list ref]) escribió:

On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 8:09 PM Florian Fainelli
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 5/31/25 03:13, Álvaro Fernández Rojas wrote:

quoted

BCM5325 doesn't implement UC_FLOOD_MASK, MC_FLOOD_MASK and IPMC_FLOOD_MASK
registers.
This has to be handled differently with other pages and registers.

Fixes: a8b659e7ff75 ("net: dsa: act as passthrough for bridge port flags")
Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <redacted>
---

[snip]

quoted

+/*************************************************************************
+ * IEEE 802.1X Registers
+ *************************************************************************/
+
+/* Multicast DLF Drop Control register (16 bit) */
+#define B53_IEEE_MCAST_DLF           0x94
+#define B53_IEEE_MCAST_DROP_EN               BIT(11)
+
+/* Unicast DLF Drop Control register (16 bit) */
+#define B53_IEEE_UCAST_DLF           0x96
+#define B53_IEEE_UCAST_DROP_EN               BIT(11)

Are you positive the 5325 implements all of those registers? They are
not documented in my databook.

They are in 5325E-DS14-R pages 112 - 112 (134/135)

That being said, I don't thing we need to touch the MC/BC/DLF rate
control registers when enabling/disabling flooding - these only limit
how much traffic may be UC / MC  on a port, but apart from that they
do not limit flooding. We don't limit this on other switch models
either.

In that case there's nothing to enable/disable on the BCM5325 and we
should do an early return on b53_port_set_ucast_flood and
b53_port_set_mcast_flood since UC_FLOOD_MASK, MC_FLOOD_MASK and
IPMC_FLOOD_MASK don't exist.

Regards,
Jonas

Best regards,
Álvaro.