netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V1 00/10] Mellanox Ethernet driver updates 2013-01-30

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 6 Feb 2013 15:46:58 +0000
From:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To:	Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
	Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V1 00/10] Mellanox Ethernet driver updates
 2013-01-30

On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 09:24 +0200, Amir Vadai wrote:
> On 05/02/2013 22:08, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 13:51 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>
> >> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 11:07:01 +0200
> >>
> >>> Hi Dave,
> >>>
> >>> This series contains updates to mlx4 driver.
> >>> Majority of the patches are small bug fixes. Another patch is to expose through
> >>> debugfs some HW resources to be used by external tools.
> >>>
> >>> Patches done against net-next commit 1b13c97: "net/vxlan: Add ethtool drvinfo"
> >>>
> >>> Changes from V0:
> >>> - Removed patch "net/mlx4_en: Add debugfs support". Need to find a standard way
> >>>    to do it, and no need to delay the other patches.
> >>
> >> All applied, thanks.
> >
> > The first time this series was posted (this is actually v2) I raised an
> > issue with the changes to interpretation of the VLAN tag in ethtool RX
> > NFC commands: <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/257392/>.
> > The semantics are now definitely inconsistent between sfc and mlx4_en.
> > I asked Alexander what ixgbe (first implementation) does with the upper
> > 4 bits, with the aim that all three implementations should be
> > consistent, but I haven't had an answer to that yet.
> >
> > Ben.
> >
> 
> I'm not sure I understand the problem here.
> 
> mlx4_en implementation is exactly like what you describe and what 
> ethtool documentation is describing.
> 
> We handle vlan_tci as the whole VLAN tag. Since we're only interested in 
> the VID in our flow steering, we check that the mask sets only the 12 
> bits of VID and use it.
>
>  From looking at sfc driver - it is exactly same there.
>
> Did I miss something?

sfc verifies that the mask (cmd->fs.m_ext.vlan_tci) is either 0 or 0xfff
(big-endian).  If any of the top 4 bits are set we reject the flow spec
as unsupported.  If I read correctly, mlx4_en was also doing that
initially, but 'net/mlx4_en: Fix vlan mask for ethtool steering rules'
changed it to ignore the top 4 bits of the mask.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html