On 8/20/19 10:52 AM, Vivien Didelot wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > > On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 12:54:44 +0300, Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I can agree that this isn't one of my brightest moments. But at least >> we get to see Cunningham's law in action :) >> When dsa_8021q is cleaning up the switch's VLAN table for the bridge >> to use it, it is good to really clean it up, i.e. not leave any VLAN >> installed on the upstream ports. >> But I think this is just an academical concern at this point. In >> vlan_filtering mode, the CPU port will accept VLAN frames with the >> dsa_8021q ID's, but they will eventually get dropped due to no >> destination. The real breaker is the pvid change. If something like >> patch 4/6 gets accepted I will drop this one. > > I wish Ward had mentioned to submit such academical concern as RFC :) > > Please submit smaller series, targeting a single functional problem each, > with clear and detailed messages.
Also, I don't think this change set is useful per-se, if we take care of removing VLANs on user facing ports, and VLAN filtering is turned on, then a frame ingressing an user port with a VLAN that is not part of the VLAN table/entries should simply be discarded on ingress, or on egress to the CPU port (depending on where the switch performs VID checking), so the CPU port cannot possibly receive such a frame, and so removing it from the CPU port is correct from a reference counting perspective, but useless in practice. Thoughts? -- Florian
