netdev - Re: [PATCH net v3 2/4] flow_offload: fix incorrect cb_priv check for flow_block

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:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 23:18:16 +0800
From:   wenxu <wenxu@...oud.cn>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, pablo@...filter.org,
        vladbu@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3 2/4] flow_offload: fix incorrect cb_priv check for
 flow_block_cb


在 2020/6/16 22:34, Simon Horman 写道:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:20:46PM +0800, wenxu wrote:
>> 在 2020/6/16 18:51, Simon Horman 写道:
>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:19:38AM +0800, wenxu@...oud.cn wrote:
>>>> From: wenxu <wenxu@...oud.cn>
>>>>
>>>> In the function __flow_block_indr_cleanup, The match stataments
>>>> this->cb_priv == cb_priv is always false, the flow_block_cb->cb_priv
>>>> is totally different data with the flow_indr_dev->cb_priv.
>>>>
>>>> Store the representor cb_priv to the flow_block_cb->indr.cb_priv in
>>>> the driver.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 1fac52da5942 ("net: flow_offload: consolidate indirect flow_block infrastructure")
>>>> Signed-off-by: wenxu <wenxu@...oud.cn>
>>> Hi Wenxu,
>>>
>>> I wonder if this can be resolved by using the cb_ident field of struct
>>> flow_block_cb.
>>>
>>> I observe that mlx5e_rep_indr_setup_block() seems to be the only call-site
>>> where the value of the cb_ident parameter of flow_block_cb_alloc() is
>>> per-block rather than per-device. So part of my proposal is to change
>>> that.
>> I check all the xxdriver_indr_setup_block. It seems all the cb_ident parameter of
>>
>> flow_block_cb_alloc is per-block. Both in the nfp_flower_setup_indr_tc_block
>>
>> and bnxt_tc_setup_indr_block.
>>
>>
>> nfp_flower_setup_indr_tc_block:
>>
>> struct nfp_flower_indr_block_cb_priv *cb_priv;
>>
>> block_cb = flow_block_cb_alloc(nfp_flower_setup_indr_block_cb,
>>                                                cb_priv, cb_priv,
>>                                                nfp_flower_setup_indr_tc_release);
>>
>>
>> bnxt_tc_setup_indr_block:
>>
>> struct bnxt_flower_indr_block_cb_priv *cb_priv;
>>
>> block_cb = flow_block_cb_alloc(bnxt_tc_setup_indr_block_cb,
>>                                                cb_priv, cb_priv,
>>                                                bnxt_tc_setup_indr_rel);
>>
>>
>> And the function flow_block_cb_is_busy called in most place. Pass the
>>
>> parameter as cb_priv but not cb_indent .
> Thanks, I see that now. But I still think it would be useful to understand
> the purpose of cb_ident. It feels like it would lead to a clean solution
> to the problem you have highlighted.

I think The cb_ident means identify.  It is used to identify the each flow block cb.

In the both flow_block_cb_is_busy and flow_block_cb_lookup function check

the block_cb->cb_ident == cb_ident.