From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] net: bridge: Clear offload_fwd_mark when passing frame up bridge interface.
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 16:07:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220505160720.27358a55@hermes.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220505225904.342388-1-andrew@lunn.ch>
On Fri, 6 May 2022 00:59:04 +0200
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> It is possible to stack bridges on top of each other. Consider the
> following which makes use of an Ethernet switch:
>
> br1
> / \
> / \
> / \
> br0.11 wlan0
> |
> br0
> / | \
> p1 p2 p3
>
> br0 is offloaded to the switch. Above br0 is a vlan interface, for
> vlan 11. This vlan interface is then a slave of br1. br1 also has
> wireless interface as a slave. This setup trunks wireless lan traffic
> over the copper network inside a VLAN.
>
> A frame received on p1 which is passed up to the bridge has the
> skb->offload_fwd_mark flag set to true, indicating it that the switch
> has dealt with forwarding the frame out ports p2 and p3 as
> needed. This flag instructs the software bridge it does not need to
> pass the frame back down again. However, the flag is not getting reset
> when the frame is passed upwards. As a result br1 sees the flag,
> wrongly interprets it, and fails to forward the frame to wlan0.
>
> When passing a frame upwards, clear the flag.
>
> RFC because i don't know the bridge code well enough if this is the
> correct place to do this, and if there are any side effects, could the
> skb be a clone, etc.
>
> Fixes: f1c2eddf4cb6 ("bridge: switchdev: Use an helper to clear forward mark")
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Bridging of bridges is not supposed to be allowed.
See:
bridge:br_if.c
/* No bridging of bridges */
if (dev->netdev_ops->ndo_start_xmit == br_dev_xmit) {
NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
"Can not enslave a bridge to a bridge");
return -ELOOP;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-05 23:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-05 22:59 [PATCH RFC] net: bridge: Clear offload_fwd_mark when passing frame up bridge interface Andrew Lunn
2022-05-05 23:07 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2022-05-06 1:18 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-05-06 15:05 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-05-06 14:36 ` Vladimir Oltean
2022-05-06 16:58 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-05-08 7:52 ` Ido Schimmel
2022-05-12 20:38 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-05-13 12:47 ` Ido Schimmel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220505160720.27358a55@hermes.local \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=idosch@mellanox.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=razor@blackwall.org \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).