Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier

[netdev@kapio-technology.com]

On 2023-02-01 19:10, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 06:34:25PM +0100, Hans J. Schultz wrote:
>> To be able to add dynamic FDB entries to drivers from userspace, the
>> dynamic flag must be added when sending RTM_NEWNEIGH events down.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Hans J. Schultz <netdev@kapio-technology.com>
>> ---
>>  include/net/switchdev.h   | 1 +
>>  net/bridge/br_switchdev.c | 2 ++
>>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/include/net/switchdev.h b/include/net/switchdev.h
>> index ca0312b78294..aaf918d4ba67 100644
>> --- a/include/net/switchdev.h
>> +++ b/include/net/switchdev.h
>> @@ -249,6 +249,7 @@ struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info {
>>  	u8 added_by_user:1,
>>  	   is_local:1,
>>  	   locked:1,
>> +	   is_dyn:1,
>>  	   offloaded:1;
>>  };
>> 
>> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
>> index 7eb6fd5bb917..4420fcbbfdb2 100644
>> --- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
>> +++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
>> @@ -136,6 +136,8 @@ static void br_switchdev_fdb_populate(struct 
>> net_bridge *br,
>>  	item->added_by_user = test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
>>  	item->offloaded = test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags);
>>  	item->is_local = test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags);
>> +	item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags) &&
> 
> Why not 'is_static' and be consistent with the bridge flag like all the
> other fields?
> 
> Regardless of how you name this field, it is irrelevant for
> 'SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE' notifications that all add FDB entries
> with the 'BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN' flag set, which makes
> 'BR_FDB_STATIC' irrelevant.
> 
>> +		item->added_by_user;
> 
> Unclear why this is needed...
> 

The answer to those two questions lies in my earlier correspondences 
(with Oltean) on the RFC version.