IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Introduced in commit 38b5beeae7 ("net: dsa: sja1105: prepare tagger
for handling DSA tags and VLAN simultaneously"), the sja1105_xmit_tpid
function solved quite a different problem than our needs are now.
Then, we used best-effort VLAN filtering and we were using the xmit_tpid
to tunnel packets coming from an 8021q upper through the TX VLAN allocated
by tag_8021q to that egress port. The need for a different VLAN protocol
depending on switch revision came from the fact that this in itself was
more of a hack to trick the hardware into accepting tunneled VLANs in
the first place.
Right now, we deny 8021q uppers (see sja1105_prechangeupper). Even if we
supported them again, we would not do that using the same method of
{tunneling the VLAN on egress, retagging the VLAN on ingress} that we
had in the best-effort VLAN filtering mode. It seems rather simpler that
we just allocate a VLAN in the VLAN table that is simply not used by the
bridge at all, or by any other port.
Anyway, I have 2 gripes with the current sja1105_xmit_tpid:
1. When sending packets on behalf of a VLAN-aware bridge (with the new
TX forwarding offload framework) plus untagged (with the tag_8021q
VLAN added by the tagger) packets, we can see that on SJA1105P/Q/R/S
and later (which have a qinq_tpid of ETH_P_8021AD), some packets sent
through the DSA master have a VLAN protocol of 0x8100 and others of
0x88a8. This is strange and there is no reason for it now. If we have
a bridge and are therefore forced to send using that bridge's TPID,
we can as well blend with that bridge's VLAN protocol for all packets.
2. The sja1105_xmit_tpid introduces a dependency on the sja1105 driver,
because it looks inside dp->priv. It is desirable to keep as much
separation between taggers and switch drivers as possible. Now it
doesn't do that anymore.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
8ded916092