netdev - Re: [patch net-next 19/19] mlxsw: spectrum: Implement TC flower offload

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]

Message-ID: <20170203073812.GE1871@nanopsycho.orion>
Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:38:12 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, idosch@...lanox.com,
        eladr@...lanox.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com,
        jhs@...atatu.com, ivecera@...hat.com, jbenc@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 19/19] mlxsw: spectrum: Implement TC flower
 offload

Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 10:37:23PM CET, f.fainelli@...il.com wrote:
>On 02/02/2017 07:12 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>> 
>> Extend the existing setup_tc ndo call and allow to offload cls_flower
>> rules. Only limited set of dissector keys and actions are supported now.
>> Use previously introduced ACL infrastructure to offload cls_flower rules
>> to be processed in the HW.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
>> ---
>
>> +	tcf_exts_to_list(exts, &actions);
>> +	list_for_each_entry(a, &actions, list) {
>> +		if (is_tcf_gact_shot(a)) {
>> +			err = mlxsw_sp_acl_rulei_act_drop(rulei);
>> +			if (err)
>> +				return err;
>> +		} else if (is_tcf_mirred_egress_redirect(a)) {
>> +			int ifindex = tcf_mirred_ifindex(a);
>> +			struct net_device *out_dev;
>> +
>> +			out_dev = __dev_get_by_index(dev_net(dev), ifindex);
>> +			if (out_dev == dev)
>> +				out_dev = NULL;
>
>You are not checking here that out_dev has the same netdev_ops pointer
>(unlike the matchall case), is that expected?

This is done later on in mlxsw_sp_acl_rulei_act_fwd.