On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:58:33AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:52:48AM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > > > If the purpose is correctness, then this is not the only flag that was > > missed. BR_HAIRPIN_MODE is also relevant for the data path, for example. > > I never wanted to suggest that I'm giving a comprehensive answer, I just > answered Qingfang's punctual question here: > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/calw65jbotyw0msod-bd1th_mkibwhhrcq29jgn+d12rxdj2...@mail.gmail.com/ > > Tobias also pointed out the same issue about BR_MULTICAST_TO_UNICAST in > conjunction with tx_fwd_offload (although the same is probably true even > without it): > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20210426170411.1789186-1-tob...@waldekranz.com/ > > > Anyway, the commit message needs to be reworded to reflect the true > > purpose of the patch. > > Agree, and potentially extended with all the bridge port flags which are > broken without switchdev driver intervention.
So, what else flags should be added to BR_PORT_FLAGS_HW_OFFLOAD?
