Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/5] IGMP snooping for local traffic

From: Andrew Lunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 21:21:56 +0100

On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 11:38:26AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 11/09/2017 11:30 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >> This means that switchdev drivers won't ever have to treat a HOST_MDB
> >> notification any differently than a PORT_MDB notification
> > 
> > No, they need to treat it very differently. 
> 
> Allow me to rephrase, switchdev drivers will ignore HOST_MDB
> notifications because that does not resolve to something they can do
> something about.

Hi Florian

Yes, they can. In fact, if they want to support IGMP snooping on the
bridge interface, they have to. How else do they know to forward
traffic to the host?

> Fine, then add a boolean to the PORT_MDB notification that says ingress
> or egress and voila, or am I missing something?

But since the semantics are so different, why not just have a
different messages?

	  Andrew