netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 04/10] net/mlx5e: Prepare IPsec packet reformat code for tunnel mode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230413120755.GM17993@unreal>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2023 15:07:55 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Raed Salem <raeds@...dia.com>, Emeel Hakim <ehakim@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 04/10] net/mlx5e: Prepare IPsec packet reformat
 code for tunnel mode

On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 06:00:00PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 09:19:06AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> > 
> > Refactor setup_pkt_reformat() function to accommodate future extension
> > to support tunnel mode.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> 
> ...
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_accel/ipsec_fs.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_accel/ipsec_fs.c
> > index 060be020ca64..980583fb1e52 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_accel/ipsec_fs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_accel/ipsec_fs.c
> > @@ -836,40 +836,78 @@ static int setup_modify_header(struct mlx5_core_dev *mdev, u32 val, u8 dir,
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int
> > +setup_pkt_transport_reformat(struct mlx5_accel_esp_xfrm_attrs *attrs,
> > +			     struct mlx5_pkt_reformat_params *reformat_params)
> > +{
> > +	u8 *reformatbf;
> > +	__be32 spi;
> > +
> > +	switch (attrs->dir) {
> > +	case XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_IN:
> > +		reformat_params->type = MLX5_REFORMAT_TYPE_DEL_ESP_TRANSPORT;
> > +		break;
> > +	case XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_OUT:
> > +		if (attrs->family == AF_INET)
> > +			reformat_params->type =
> > +				MLX5_REFORMAT_TYPE_ADD_ESP_TRANSPORT_OVER_IPV4;
> > +		else
> > +			reformat_params->type =
> > +				MLX5_REFORMAT_TYPE_ADD_ESP_TRANSPORT_OVER_IPV6;
> 
> Maybe this is nicer? Maybe not.
> 
> 		reformat_params->type = attrs->family == AF_INET ?
> 			MLX5_REFORMAT_TYPE_ADD_ESP_TRANSPORT_OVER_IPV4 :
> 			MLX5_REFORMAT_TYPE_ADD_ESP_TRANSPORT_OVER_IPV6;
> 
> > +
> > +		reformatbf = kzalloc(16, GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> I know you are just moving code around.
> But 16 is doing a lot of work in this function.
> Could it be a #define ?

Done

> 
> > +		if (!reformatbf)
> > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +		/* convert to network format */
> > +		spi = htonl(attrs->spi);
> > +		memcpy(reformatbf, &spi, 4);
> 
> This seems to be a lot of work to copy a word.
> But anyway, maybe:
> 
> 		memcpy(reformatbf, &spi, sizeof(spi));

Done

> 
> > +
> > +		reformat_params->param_0 = attrs->authsize;
> > +		reformat_params->size = 16;
> > +		reformat_params->data = reformatbf;
> > +		break;
> > +	default:
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> 
> ...