| Message ID | 20240422152656.175627-1-ast@fiberby.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net-next] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: flower: validate control flags | expand |
Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 05:26:55PM CEST, ast@fiberby.net wrote: >This driver currently doesn't support any control flags. > >Use flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() to check for control flags, >such as can be set through `tc flower ... ip_flags frag`. > >In case any control flags are masked, flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() >sets a NL extended error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP. > >Only compile-tested. > >Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net> Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com> Next time, could you please bundle similar/related patches into a patchset? Thanks!
Hi Jiri, Thank you for the reviews. On 4/23/24 12:57 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Next time, could you please bundle similar/related patches into > a patchset? Sure, I did it per driver to make it easier to handle differences in get_maintainer output and be able to integrate feedback into later patches for other drivers, and since the patches could be applied individually. When I started I through that more drivers had their own trees, wasn't aware that it was only Intel, and that mlx5-next was dead. For instance the feedback from Jianbo on mlx5 patch, also went into the octeontx2-pf patch. I only have one patch left in the queue now (for qede).
Hello: This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main) by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>: On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 15:26:55 +0000 you wrote: > This driver currently doesn't support any control flags. > > Use flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() to check for control flags, > such as can be set through `tc flower ... ip_flags frag`. > > In case any control flags are masked, flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() > sets a NL extended error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP. > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [net-next] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw: flower: validate control flags https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/f97e0a5eac15 You are awesome, thank you!
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c index 764ed298b570..6fe4edabba44 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c @@ -1404,6 +1404,9 @@ static int cpsw_qos_clsflower_add_policer(struct cpsw_priv *priv, return -EOPNOTSUPP; } + if (flow_rule_match_has_control_flags(rule, extack)) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + if (!flow_rule_match_key(rule, FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ETH_ADDRS)) { NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Not matching on eth address"); return -EOPNOTSUPP;
This driver currently doesn't support any control flags. Use flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() to check for control flags, such as can be set through `tc flower ... ip_flags frag`. In case any control flags are masked, flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() sets a NL extended error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP. Only compile-tested. Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net> --- drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw_priv.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)