Re: [PATCH net-next v4 01/10] net: bridge: extend the process of special frames

From: "henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com" <henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com>
To: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@nvidia.com>
Cc: "bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org" 
	<bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"jiri@mellanox.com" <jiri@mellanox.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@nvidia.com>,
	"idosch@mellanox.com" <idosch@mellanox.com>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>,
	"horatiu.vultur@microchip.com" <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 01/10] net: bridge: extend the process of special frames
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 11:57:44 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201012115744.56mjeuoe7nlonjxt@soft-test08> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3fc314a2074001f7b39bada2c50529eb2aefd077.camel@nvidia.com>

Thanks for the review. Comments below.

The 10/12/2020 09:12, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 14:35 +0000, Henrik Bjoernlund wrote:
> > This patch extends the processing of frames in the bridge. Currently MRP
> > frames needs special processing and the current implementation doesn't
> > allow a nice way to process different frame types. Therefore try to
> > improve this by adding a list that contains frame types that need
> > special processing. This list is iterated for each input frame and if
> > there is a match based on frame type then these functions will be called
> > and decide what to do with the frame. It can process the frame then the
> > bridge doesn't need to do anything or don't process so then the bridge
> > will do normal forwarding.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Henrik Bjoernlund  <henrik.bjoernlund@microchip.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Horatiu Vultur  <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
> > ---
> >  net/bridge/br_device.c  |  1 +
> >  net/bridge/br_input.c   | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  net/bridge/br_mrp.c     | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> >  net/bridge/br_private.h | 18 ++++++++++++------
> >  4 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> [snip]
> > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_private.h b/net/bridge/br_private.h
> > index 345118e35c42..3e62ce2ef8a5 100644
> > --- a/net/bridge/br_private.h
> > +++ b/net/bridge/br_private.h
> > @@ -480,6 +480,8 @@ struct net_bridge {
> >  #endif
> >       struct hlist_head               fdb_list;
> >
> > +     struct hlist_head               frame_type_list;
> 
> Since there will be a v5, I'd suggest to move this struct member in the first
> cache line as it will be always used in the bridge fast-path for all cases.
> In order to make room for it there you can move port_list after fdb_hash_tbl and
> add this in its place, port_list is currently used only when flooding and soon
> I'll even change that.
> 
> Thanks,
>  Nik
>
I will do change as requested.

> > +
> >  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BRIDGE_MRP)
> >       struct list_head                mrp_list;
> >  #endif
> > @@ -755,6 +757,16 @@ int nbp_backup_change(struct net_bridge_port *p, struct net_device *backup_dev);
> >  int br_handle_frame_finish(struct net *net, struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb);
> >  rx_handler_func_t *br_get_rx_handler(const struct net_device *dev);
> >
> > +struct br_frame_type {
> > +     __be16                  type;
> > +     int                     (*frame_handler)(struct net_bridge_port *port,
> > +                                              struct sk_buff *skb);
> > +     struct hlist_node       list;
> > +};
> > +
> > +void br_add_frame(struct net_bridge *br, struct br_frame_type *ft);
> > +void br_del_frame(struct net_bridge *br, struct br_frame_type *ft);
> > +
> >  static inline bool br_rx_handler_check_rcu(const struct net_device *dev)
> >  {
> >       return rcu_dereference(dev->rx_handler) == br_get_rx_handler(dev);
> > @@ -1417,7 +1429,6 @@ extern int (*br_fdb_test_addr_hook)(struct net_device *dev, unsigned char *addr)
> >  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BRIDGE_MRP)
> >  int br_mrp_parse(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
> >                struct nlattr *attr, int cmd, struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
> > -int br_mrp_process(struct net_bridge_port *p, struct sk_buff *skb);
> >  bool br_mrp_enabled(struct net_bridge *br);
> >  void br_mrp_port_del(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p);
> >  int br_mrp_fill_info(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_bridge *br);
> > @@ -1429,11 +1440,6 @@ static inline int br_mrp_parse(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
> >       return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >  }
> >
> > -static inline int br_mrp_process(struct net_bridge_port *p, struct sk_buff *skb)
> > -{
> > -     return 0;
> > -}
> > -
> >  static inline bool br_mrp_enabled(struct net_bridge *br)
> >  {
> >       return false;
> 

-- 
/Henrik