Since user added entries in the bridge FDB will get the BR_FDB_OFFLOADED
flag set, we do not want the bridge to age those entries and we want the
entries to be deleted in the bridge upon an SWITCHDEV_FDB_DEL_TO_BRIDGE
event.

Signed-off-by: Hans J. Schultz <netdev@kapio-technology.com>
---
 net/bridge/br_fdb.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
index e69a872bfc1d..b0c23a72bc76 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
@@ -537,6 +537,7 @@ void br_fdb_cleanup(struct work_struct *work)
 		unsigned long this_timer = f->updated + delay;
 
 		if (test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &f->flags) ||
+		    test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &f->flags) ||
 		    test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &f->flags)) {
 			if (test_bit(BR_FDB_NOTIFY, &f->flags)) {
 				if (time_after(this_timer, now))
@@ -1465,7 +1466,9 @@ int br_fdb_external_learn_del(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
 	spin_lock_bh(&br->hash_lock);
 
 	fdb = br_fdb_find(br, addr, vid);
-	if (fdb && test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &fdb->flags))
+	if (fdb &&
+	    (test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &fdb->flags) ||
+	     test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags)))
 		fdb_delete(br, fdb, swdev_notify);
 	else
 		err = -ENOENT;
-- 
2.34.1

On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 06:34:28PM +0100, Hans J. Schultz wrote:
> Since user added entries in the bridge FDB will get the BR_FDB_OFFLOADED
> flag set, we do not want the bridge to age those entries and we want the
> entries to be deleted in the bridge upon an SWITCHDEV_FDB_DEL_TO_BRIDGE
> event.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hans J. Schultz <netdev@kapio-technology.com>
> ---
>  net/bridge/br_fdb.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
> index e69a872bfc1d..b0c23a72bc76 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
> @@ -537,6 +537,7 @@ void br_fdb_cleanup(struct work_struct *work)
>  		unsigned long this_timer = f->updated + delay;
>  
>  		if (test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &f->flags) ||
> +		    test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &f->flags) ||
>  		    test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &f->flags)) {
>  			if (test_bit(BR_FDB_NOTIFY, &f->flags)) {
>  				if (time_after(this_timer, now))

Looks correct

> @@ -1465,7 +1466,9 @@ int br_fdb_external_learn_del(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
>  	spin_lock_bh(&br->hash_lock);
>  
>  	fdb = br_fdb_find(br, addr, vid);
> -	if (fdb && test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &fdb->flags))
> +	if (fdb &&
> +	    (test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &fdb->flags) ||
> +	     test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags)))

This also looks correct, but the function name is not really accurate
anymore. I guess you can keep it as-is unless someone has a better name

>  		fdb_delete(br, fdb, swdev_notify);
>  	else
>  		err = -ENOENT;
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>

On 2023-02-01 19:24, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> 
> This also looks correct, but the function name is not really accurate
> anymore. I guess you can keep it as-is unless someone has a better name
> 
>>  		fdb_delete(br, fdb, swdev_notify);
>>  	else
>>  		err = -ENOENT;
>> --
>> 2.34.1
>> 

I have been wondering if it makes sense to have both external_learn and 
offloaded flags as they now work pretty much the same seen from the 
bridge. But as I don't know other switches, I guess there is some good 
reason to have the two?