netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ethtool: allow flow-type ether without IP protocol field

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:   Thu, 20 Aug 2020 21:34:26 +0200
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Vishal Kulkarni <vishal@...lsio.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        rahul.lakkireddy@...lsio.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ethtool: allow flow-type ether without IP
 protocol field

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 12:25:03AM +0530, Vishal Kulkarni wrote:
> Set IP protocol mask only when IP protocol field is set.
> This will allow flow-type ether with vlan rule which don't have
> protocol field to apply.
> 
> ethtool -N ens5f4 flow-type ether proto 0x8100 vlan 0x600\
> m 0x1FFF action 3 loc 16
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vishal Kulkarni <vishal@...lsio.com>
> ---
>  net/ethtool/ioctl.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/ethtool/ioctl.c b/net/ethtool/ioctl.c
> index 441794e0034f..e6f5cf52023c 100644
> --- a/net/ethtool/ioctl.c
> +++ b/net/ethtool/ioctl.c
> @@ -3025,13 +3025,14 @@ ethtool_rx_flow_rule_create(const struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec_input *input)
>  	case TCP_V4_FLOW:
>  	case TCP_V6_FLOW:
>  		match->key.basic.ip_proto = IPPROTO_TCP;
> +		match->mask.basic.ip_proto = 0xff;
>  		break;
>  	case UDP_V4_FLOW:
>  	case UDP_V6_FLOW:
>  		match->key.basic.ip_proto = IPPROTO_UDP;
> +		match->mask.basic.ip_proto = 0xff;
>  		break;
>  	}
> -	match->mask.basic.ip_proto = 0xff;
>  
>  	match->dissector.used_keys |= BIT(FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_BASIC);
>  	match->dissector.offset[FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_BASIC] =
> -- 
> 2.21.1
> 

This is certainly correct. We should also handle SCTP_V4_FLOW and
SCTP_V6_FLOW in the same way as {TCP,UDP}_V{4,6}_FLOW but that is an
unrelated problem which should be handled separately (and also needs to
be addressed in the switch statement above this one).

Reviewed-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)