> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
> Simon Horman
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2025 3:57 PM
> To: Zaremba, Larysa <[email protected]>
> Cc: Nguyen, Anthony L <[email protected]>; intel-wired-
> [email protected]; Kitszel, Przemyslaw <[email protected]>;
> Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>; David S. Miller
> <[email protected]>; Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>; Jakub
> Kicinski <[email protected]>; Paolo Abeni <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Michal Swiatkowski
> <[email protected]>; Pacuszka, MateuszX
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v4 2/6] ice: do not add LLDP-
> specific filter if not necessary
> 
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:50:36AM +0100, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > Commit 34295a3696fb ("ice: implement new LLDP filter command")
> > introduced the ability to use LLDP-specific filter that directs all
> > LLDP traffic to a single VSI. However, current goal is for all trusted
> > VFs to be able to see LLDP neighbors, which is impossible to do with
> > the special filter.
> >
> > Make using the generic filter the default choice and fall back to
> > special one only if a generic filter cannot be added. That way setups
> > with "NVMs where an already existent LLDP filter is blocking the
> > creation of a filter to allow LLDP packets" will still be able to
> > configure software Rx LLDP on PF only, while all other setups would be able
> to forward them to VFs too.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Michal Swiatkowski <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <[email protected]>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
> 
> ...
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> > index aaa592ffd2d8..f2e51bacecf8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> > @@ -6010,15 +6010,21 @@ bool ice_fw_supports_lldp_fltr_ctrl(struct

Tested-by: Rafal Romanowski <[email protected]>


Reply via email to