Subject: Re: [patch net-next v4 5/7] bridge: defer switchdev fdb del call in fdb_del_external_learn

From: John Fastabend <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:31:39 -0700

On 15-10-12 08:28 PM, Scott Feldman wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Jiri Pirko <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <[email-masked]>
>>
>> Since spinlock is held here, defer the switchdev operation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <[email-masked]>
>> ---
>>  net/bridge/br_fdb.c | 5 ++++-
>>  net/bridge/br_if.c  | 3 +++
>>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
>> index f5e7da0..c88bd8e 100644
>> --- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
>> +++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
>> @@ -134,7 +134,10 @@ static void fdb_del_hw_addr(struct net_bridge *br, const unsigned char *addr)
>>  static void fdb_del_external_learn(struct net_bridge_fdb_entry *f)
>>  {
>>         struct switchdev_obj_port_fdb fdb = {
>> -               .obj.id = SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_FDB,
>> +               .obj = {
>> +                       .id = SWITCHDEV_OBJ_ID_PORT_FDB,
>> +                       .flags = SWITCHDEV_F_DEFER,
>> +               },
>>                 .vid = f->vlan_id,
>>         };
>>
>> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_if.c b/net/bridge/br_if.c
>> index 934cae9..09147cb 100644
>> --- a/net/bridge/br_if.c
>> +++ b/net/bridge/br_if.c
>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>  #include <net/sock.h>
>>  #include <linux/if_vlan.h>
>> +#include <net/switchdev.h>
>>
>>  #include "br_private.h"
>>
>> @@ -249,6 +250,8 @@ static void del_nbp(struct net_bridge_port *p)
>>         list_del_rcu(&p->list);
>>
>>         br_fdb_delete_by_port(br, p, 0, 1);
>> +       switchdev_flush_deferred();
>> +
> 
> This potentially flushes other (valid) work on the deferred queue not
> related to FDB del.
> 
> I wonder if this flush step is necessary at all?  The work we deferred
> to delete the FDB entry can still happen after the port has been
> removed (del_nbp).  If the port driver/device find the FDB entry, then
> delete it, otherwise ignore it.
> 

Just the first thing that springs to mind reading this comment is,

  - del gets deffered
  - add fdb
  - del runs

Is there an issue here? Sorry I'll do a more thorough review now just
thought I would toss it out there before I forget.

Thanks,
John