* Re: [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags
2024-04-22 15:27 [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
@ 2024-04-22 23:41 ` Jacob Keller
2024-04-22 23:43 ` Jacob Keller
2024-04-23 4:54 ` Sunil Kovvuri Goutham
2024-04-25 3:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jacob Keller @ 2024-04-22 23:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen, netdev
Cc: linux-kernel, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Sunil Goutham, Geetha sowjanya, Subbaraya Sundeep,
hariprasad, Suman Ghosh
On 4/22/2024 8:27 AM, Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen wrote:
> Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() to reject filters with
> unsupported control flags.
>
> In case any unsupported control flags are masked,
> flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() sets a NL extended
> error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP.
>
> Remove FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG specific error message,
> and treat it as any other unsupported control flag.
>
> Only compile-tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> index 6d4ce2ece8d0..e63cc1eb6d89 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> @@ -700,10 +700,6 @@ static int otx2_tc_prepare_flow(struct otx2_nic *nic, struct otx2_tc_flow *node,
> u32 val;
>
> flow_rule_match_control(rule, &match);
> - if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG) {
> - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "HW doesn't support frag first/later");
> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> - }
>
> if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT) {
> val = match.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT;
> @@ -721,6 +717,10 @@ static int otx2_tc_prepare_flow(struct otx2_nic *nic, struct otx2_tc_flow *node,
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> }
> +
> + if (!flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT,
> + match.mask->flags, extack))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
This confuses me since you pass FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT here, but you
removed the check for FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG??
Am I misunderstanding how flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags works?
The code just above this appears to support FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT.
Here is the implementation of flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags for reference:
> /**
> * flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() - check for supported control flags
> * @supp_flags: control flags supported by driver
> * @ctrl_flags: control flags present in rule
> * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
> *
> * Return: true if only supported control flags are set, false otherwise.
> */
> static inline bool flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(const u32 supp_flags,
> const u32 ctrl_flags,
> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> {
> if (likely((ctrl_flags & ~supp_flags) == 0))
> return true;
>
> NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(extack,
> "Unsupported match on control.flags %#x",
> ctrl_flags);
>
> return false;
> }
>
This seems to me that it you accidentally passed FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT
when you meant FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG??
I also think its a bit strange that you moved the placement of the check
instead of replacing in the same location as where the previous check was.
> }
>
> if (flow_rule_match_key(rule, FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ETH_ADDRS)) {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags
2024-04-22 23:41 ` Jacob Keller
@ 2024-04-22 23:43 ` Jacob Keller
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jacob Keller @ 2024-04-22 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen, netdev
Cc: linux-kernel, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Sunil Goutham, Geetha sowjanya, Subbaraya Sundeep,
hariprasad, Suman Ghosh
On 4/22/2024 4:41 PM, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>
> On 4/22/2024 8:27 AM, Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen wrote:
>> Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() to reject filters with
>> unsupported control flags.
>>
>> In case any unsupported control flags are masked,
>> flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() sets a NL extended
>> error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP.
>>
>> Remove FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG specific error message,
>> and treat it as any other unsupported control flag.
>>
>> Only compile-tested.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c | 8 ++++----
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
>> index 6d4ce2ece8d0..e63cc1eb6d89 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
>> @@ -700,10 +700,6 @@ static int otx2_tc_prepare_flow(struct otx2_nic *nic, struct otx2_tc_flow *node,
>> u32 val;
>>
>> flow_rule_match_control(rule, &match);
>> - if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG) {
>> - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "HW doesn't support frag first/later");
>> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> - }
>>
>> if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT) {
>> val = match.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT;
>> @@ -721,6 +717,10 @@ static int otx2_tc_prepare_flow(struct otx2_nic *nic, struct otx2_tc_flow *node,
>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> }
>> }
>> +
>> + if (!flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT,
>> + match.mask->flags, extack))
>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> This confuses me since you pass FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT here, but you
> removed the check for FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG??
>
> Am I misunderstanding how flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags works?
>
> The code just above this appears to support FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT.
>
> Here is the implementation of flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags for reference:
>
>> /**
>> * flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() - check for supported control flags
>> * @supp_flags: control flags supported by driver
>> * @ctrl_flags: control flags present in rule
>> * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
>> *
>> * Return: true if only supported control flags are set, false otherwise.
>> */
>> static inline bool flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(const u32 supp_flags,
>> const u32 ctrl_flags,
>> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
>> {
>> if (likely((ctrl_flags & ~supp_flags) == 0))
>> return true;
>>
>> NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(extack,
>> "Unsupported match on control.flags %#x",
>> ctrl_flags);
>>
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>
> This seems to me that it you accidentally passed FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT
> when you meant FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG??
>
> I also think its a bit strange that you moved the placement of the check
> instead of replacing in the same location as where the previous check was.
>
>
Ah, I see what I missed. This takes the list of supported flags and
inverts it, and checks if any other flags were passed.
This is better since it guarantees future flags or other unknown flags
are rejected.
Ok. Sorry for the confusion.
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags
2024-04-22 15:27 [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
2024-04-22 23:41 ` Jacob Keller
@ 2024-04-23 4:54 ` Sunil Kovvuri Goutham
2024-04-25 3:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sunil Kovvuri Goutham @ 2024-04-23 4:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen, netdev
Cc: linux-kernel, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Geethasowjanya Akula, Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta,
Hariprasad Kelam, Suman Ghosh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2024 8:58 PM
> To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>; Eric Dumazet
> <edumazet@google.com>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>; Paolo Abeni
> <pabeni@redhat.com>; Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@marvell.com>;
> Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@marvell.com>; Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta
> <sbhatta@marvell.com>; Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@marvell.com>; Suman
> Ghosh <sumang@marvell.com>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for
> unsupported control flags
>
> Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() to reject filters with unsupported
> control flags.
>
> In case any unsupported control flags are masked,
> flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() sets a NL extended error message, and we
> return -EOPNOTSUPP.
>
> Remove FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG specific error message, and treat it as any
> other unsupported control flag.
>
> Only compile-tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> index 6d4ce2ece8d0..e63cc1eb6d89 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_tc.c
> @@ -700,10 +700,6 @@ static int otx2_tc_prepare_flow(struct otx2_nic *nic,
> struct otx2_tc_flow *node,
> u32 val;
>
> flow_rule_match_control(rule, &match);
> - if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG) {
> - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "HW doesn't
> support frag first/later");
> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> - }
>
> if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT) {
> val = match.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT;
> @@ -721,6 +717,10 @@ static int otx2_tc_prepare_flow(struct otx2_nic *nic,
> struct otx2_tc_flow *node,
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
> }
> +
> + if
> (!flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT,
> + match.mask->flags,
> extack))
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
>
> if (flow_rule_match_key(rule, FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ETH_ADDRS)) {
> --
> 2.43.0
Reviewed-by: Sunil Goutham <sgoutham@marvell.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags
2024-04-22 15:27 [PATCH net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
2024-04-22 23:41 ` Jacob Keller
2024-04-23 4:54 ` Sunil Kovvuri Goutham
@ 2024-04-25 3:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2024-04-25 3:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: =?utf-8?b?QXNiasO4cm4gU2xvdGggVMO4bm5lc2VuIDxhc3RAZmliZXJieS5uZXQ+?=
Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, davem, edumazet, kuba, pabeni, sgoutham,
gakula, sbhatta, hkelam, sumang
Hello:
This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 15:27:34 +0000 you wrote:
> Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() to reject filters with
> unsupported control flags.
>
> In case any unsupported control flags are masked,
> flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() sets a NL extended
> error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net-next] octeontx2-pf: flower: check for unsupported control flags
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/3c3adb22510c
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread