Commit d27656d0 authored by Vladimir Oltean's avatar Vladimir Oltean Committed by David S. Miller

docs: net: dsa: sja1105: document limitations of tc-flower rule VLAN awareness

After change "net: dsa: tag_8021q: replace the SVL bridging with
VLAN-unaware IVL bridging", tag_8021q enforces two different pvids on a
port, depending on whether it is standalone or in a VLAN-unaware bridge.

Up until now, there was a single pvid, represented by
dsa_tag_8021q_rx_vid(), and that was used as the VLAN for VLAN-unaware
virtual link rules, regardless of whether the port was bridged or
standalone.

To keep VLAN-unaware virtual links working, we need to follow whether
the port is in a bridge or not, and update the VLAN ID from those rules.

In fact we can't fully do that. Depending on whether the switch is
VLAN-aware or not, we can accept Virtual Link rules with just the MAC
DA, or with a MAC DA and a VID. So we already deny changes to the VLAN
awareness of the switch. But the VLAN awareness may also change as a
result of joining or leaving a bridge.

One might say we could just allow the following: a port may leave a
VLAN-unaware bridge while it has VLAN-unaware VL (tc-flower) rules, and
the driver will update those with the new tag_8021q pvid for standalone
mode, but the driver won't accept joining a bridge at all while VL rules
were installed in standalone mode. This is sort of a compromise made
because leaving a bridge is an operation that cannot be vetoed.
But this sort of setup change is not fully supported, either: as
mentioned, VLAN filtering changes can also be triggered by leaving a
bridge, therefore, the existing veto we have in place for turning VLAN
filtering off with VLAN-aware VL rules active still isn't fully
effective.

I really don't know how to deal with this in a way that produces
predictable behavior for user space. Since at the moment, keeping this
feature fully functional on constellation changes (not changing the
tag_8021q port pvid when joining a bridge) is blocking progress for the
DSA FDB isolation, I'd rather document it as a (potentially temporary)
limitation and go on without it.
Signed-off-by: default avatarVladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent d7f9787a
...@@ -293,6 +293,33 @@ of dropped frames, which is a sum of frames dropped due to timing violations, ...@@ -293,6 +293,33 @@ of dropped frames, which is a sum of frames dropped due to timing violations,
lack of destination ports and MTU enforcement checks). Byte-level counters are lack of destination ports and MTU enforcement checks). Byte-level counters are
not available. not available.
Limitations
===========
The SJA1105 switch family always performs VLAN processing. When configured as
VLAN-unaware, frames carry a different VLAN tag internally, depending on
whether the port is standalone or under a VLAN-unaware bridge.
The virtual link keys are always fixed at {MAC DA, VLAN ID, VLAN PCP}, but the
driver asks for the VLAN ID and VLAN PCP when the port is under a VLAN-aware
bridge. Otherwise, it fills in the VLAN ID and PCP automatically, based on
whether the port is standalone or in a VLAN-unaware bridge, and accepts only
"VLAN-unaware" tc-flower keys (MAC DA).
The existing tc-flower keys that are offloaded using virtual links are no
longer operational after one of the following happens:
- port was standalone and joins a bridge (VLAN-aware or VLAN-unaware)
- port is part of a bridge whose VLAN awareness state changes
- port was part of a bridge and becomes standalone
- port was standalone, but another port joins a VLAN-aware bridge and this
changes the global VLAN awareness state of the bridge
The driver cannot veto all these operations, and it cannot update/remove the
existing tc-flower filters either. So for proper operation, the tc-flower
filters should be installed only after the forwarding configuration of the port
has been made, and removed by user space before making any changes to it.
Device Tree bindings and board design Device Tree bindings and board design
===================================== =====================================
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment