netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/8] net: microchip: sparx5: Reset VCAP counter for new rules

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Y7aT8xGOCfvC/U0a@kadam>
Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 12:10:11 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
To:     Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Casper Andersson <casper.casan@...il.com>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@...o.com>,
        Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>,
        Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/8] net: microchip: sparx5: Reset VCAP counter
 for new rules

On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 09:13:29AM +0100, Steen Hegelund wrote:
> When a rule counter is external to the VCAP such as the Sparx5 IS2 counters
> are, then this counter must be reset when a new rule is created.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api.c       | 3 +++
>  drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c | 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api.c
> index b9b6432f4094..67e0a3d9103a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api.c
> @@ -1808,6 +1808,7 @@ int vcap_add_rule(struct vcap_rule *rule)
>  {
>  	struct vcap_rule_internal *ri = to_intrule(rule);
>  	struct vcap_rule_move move = {0};
> +	struct vcap_counter ctr = {0};
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	ret = vcap_api_check(ri->vctrl);
> @@ -1833,6 +1834,8 @@ int vcap_add_rule(struct vcap_rule *rule)
>  	ret = vcap_write_rule(ri);
>  	if (ret)
>  		pr_err("%s:%d: rule write error: %d\n", __func__, __LINE__, ret);
> +	/* Set the counter to zero */
> +	ret = vcap_write_counter(ri, &ctr);
>  out:
>  	mutex_unlock(&ri->admin->lock);
>  	return ret;

I feel like you intended to send a v2 series but accidentally resent
the v1 series.  Otherwise I guess I have the same question as before.

regards,
dan carpenter