[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1277150272.2100.47.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:57:52 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc: jeff@...zik.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
gospo@...hat.com,
Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [ethtool PATCH] ethtool: Support n-tuple filter programming
On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 23:51 -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> From: Peter Waskiewicz <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
>
> Program underlying ethernet devices with n-tuple flow classification
> filters.
>
> This also adds a new flag to ethtool_flags, allowing n-tuple
> programming to be toggled using the set_flags call.
I just noticed a problem with the implementation which makes me wonder
whether this was tested at all:
[...]
> +static struct cmdline_info cmdline_ntuple[] = {
> + { "src-ip", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.h_u.tcp_ip4_spec.ip4src, NULL },
> + { "src-ip-mask", CMDL_UINT, &ntuple_fs.m_u.tcp_ip4_spec.ip4src, NULL },
> + { "dst-ip", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.h_u.tcp_ip4_spec.ip4dst, NULL },
> + { "dst-ip-mask", CMDL_UINT, &ntuple_fs.m_u.tcp_ip4_spec.ip4dst, NULL },
> + { "src-port", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.h_u.tcp_ip4_spec.psrc, NULL },
> + { "src-port-mask", CMDL_UINT, &ntuple_fs.m_u.tcp_ip4_spec.psrc, NULL },
> + { "dst-port", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.h_u.tcp_ip4_spec.pdst, NULL },
> + { "dst-port-mask", CMDL_UINT, &ntuple_fs.m_u.tcp_ip4_spec.pdst, NULL },
> + { "vlan", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.vlan_tag, NULL },
> + { "vlan-mask", CMDL_UINT, &ntuple_fs.vlan_tag_mask, NULL },
> + { "user-def", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.data, NULL },
> + { "user-def-mask", CMDL_UINT, &ntuple_fs.data_mask, NULL },
> + { "action", CMDL_INT, &ntuple_fs.action, NULL },
> +};
[...]
> + if (mode == MODE_SNTUPLE) {
> + if (!strcmp(argp[i], "flow-type")) {
> + i += 1;
> + if (i >= argc) {
> + show_usage(1);
> + break;
> + }
> + ntuple_fs.flow_type =
> + rxflow_str_to_type(argp[i]);
> + i += 1;
> + parse_generic_cmdline(argc, argp, i,
> + &sntuple_changed,
> + cmdline_ntuple,
> + ARRAY_SIZE(cmdline_ntuple));
> + i = argc;
> + break;
> + } else {
> + show_usage(1);
> + }
> + break;
> + }
[...]
parse_generic_cmdline() will write an int for each argument defined with
type CMDL_INT or CMDL_UINT. But the fields in ntuple_fs are not all of
type int (or even 32-bit) - some of them are 16-bit or 64-bit, and some
of them are big-endian. I also wonder whether anyone really wants to
enter an IPv4 address as a single integer.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists