Hi Nikolay,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 01:28:14PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> On 18/10/2021 11:26, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > There is no meaning to set an IGMP counter/timer to 0. Or it will cause
> > unexpected behavior. E.g. if set multicast_membership_interval to 0,
> > bridge will remove the mdb immediately after adding.
> >
> > Fixes: 79b859f573d6 ("bridge: netlink: add support for
> > multicast_last_member_count")
> > Fixes: b89e6babad4b ("bridge: netlink: add support for
> > multicast_startup_query_count")
> > Fixes: 7e4df51eb35d ("bridge: netlink: add support for igmp's intervals")
> > Signed-off-by: Hangbin Liu <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > net/bridge/br_netlink.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > net/bridge/br_sysfs_br.c | 75 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > 2 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> >
>
> Nacked-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <[email protected]>
>
> For a few reasons,
> I'll start with the obvious that - yes, users are allowed to change the
> values to non-RFC
> compliant, but we cannot change that now as we'd risk breaking user-space
> which is probably
> doing that somewhere with some of the values below. We can fix any issues
> that might arise
> from doing it though, so it doesn't affect normal operation. If changing some
> of the options
> to 0 or to unreasonably high values lead to problems let's fix those and we
> could discuss
> adding constraints there if necessary.
I started this patch when I saw there is not limit for setting
multicast_membership_interval to 0, which will cause bridge remove the
mdb directly after adding. Do you think this is a problem.
And what about others? I don't think there is a meaning to set other intervals
to 0.
>
> The second issue is that you're mixing different checks below, you say do not
> allow zero
> but you're also checking for RFC compliance between different values.
Do you mean the RFC3376 8.3 rule? I can fix it in another patch.
>
> The third issue is that you haven't done the same change for the same values
> for per-vlan
> multicast options (we have the same options per-vlan as well).
Ah, thanks, I could fix that.
>
> Your fixes tags are wrong, too. Most of these values could be set well before
> they were
> available through netlink.
Oh... Then how should I set the fixes tag? Since I want fix both the netlink
configs and sys configs. Add a new one d902eee43f19 ("bridge: Add multicast
count/interval sysfs entries")
>
> Note on the style - generally I'd add helpers to set them and add the
> constraints in those
> helpers, so they can be used for both netlink and sysfs. It would definitely
> target net-next
> unless it's an actual bug fix.
How about a helper like:
int br_multicast_set_interval(unsigned long *mcast_val, u64 val)
{
if (val) {
mcast_val = clock_t_to_jiffies(val);
return 0;
} else {
NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Invalid multicast interval, should not
be 0");
return -EINVAL;
}
}
Thanks
Hangbin
