On 9/23/20 1:14 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 08:11:54PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/net/dsa.h b/include/net/dsa.h
>> index d16057c5987a..b539241a7533 100644
>> --- a/include/net/dsa.h
>> +++ b/include/net/dsa.h
>> @@ -301,6 +301,14 @@ struct dsa_switch {
>>       */
>>      bool                    configure_vlan_while_not_filtering;
>>  
>> +    /* If the switch driver always programs the CPU port as egress tagged
>> +     * despite the VLAN configuration indicating otherwise, then setting
>> +     * @untag_bridge_pvid will force the DSA receive path to pop the 
>> bridge's
>> +     * default_pvid VLAN tagged frames to offer a consistent behavior
>> +     * between a vlan_filtering=0 and vlan_filtering=1 bridge device.
>> +     */
>> +    bool                    untag_bridge_pvid;
>> +
>>      /* In case vlan_filtering_is_global is set, the VLAN awareness state
>>       * should be retrieved from here and not from the per-port settings.
>>       */
>> diff --git a/net/dsa/dsa.c b/net/dsa/dsa.c
>> index 5c18c0214aac..dec4ab59b7c4 100644
>> --- a/net/dsa/dsa.c
>> +++ b/net/dsa/dsa.c
>> @@ -225,6 +225,15 @@ static int dsa_switch_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct 
>> net_device *dev,
>>      skb->pkt_type = PACKET_HOST;
>>      skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, skb->dev);
>>  
>> +    if (unlikely(cpu_dp->ds->untag_bridge_pvid)) {
>> +            nskb = dsa_untag_bridge_pvid(skb);
>> +            if (!nskb) {
>> +                    kfree_skb(skb);
>> +                    return 0;
>> +            }
>> +            skb = nskb;
>> +    }
>> +
>>      s = this_cpu_ptr(p->stats64);
>>      u64_stats_update_begin(&s->syncp);
>>      s->rx_packets++;
> 
> I was thinking a lot simpler. Maybe you could just tail-call
> dsa_untag_bridge_pvid(skb) at the end of your .rcv function instead of
> putting it in the common receive path. I specifically wrote it to look
> at hdr->h_vlan_proto instead of skb->protocol, so it wouldn't depend on
> eth_type_trans().

Yes, good point, there is no point in promoting this to the main receive
path until we have a second user of that facility, v2 coming shortly.
-- 
Florian

Reply via email to