| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230611173503.GF12152@unreal>
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2023 20:35:03 +0300
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>
Cc: paulb@...dia.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [bug report] net/mlx5e: TC, Set CT miss to the specific ct
action instance
+ netdev
On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 10:09:57AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hello Paul Blakey,
>
> The patch 6702782845a5: "net/mlx5e: TC, Set CT miss to the specific
> ct action instance" from Feb 18, 2023, leads to the following Smatch
> static checker warning:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c:5648 mlx5e_tc_action_miss_mapping_get() warn: missing error code 'err'
>
> Let's include some older unpublished Smatch stuff as well.
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c:1683 mlx5e_tc_query_route_vport() info: return a literal instead of 'err'
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c:4786 mlx5e_stats_flower() warn: missing error code 'err'
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c
> 1665 int mlx5e_tc_query_route_vport(struct net_device *out_dev, struct net_device *route_dev, u16 *vport)
> 1666 {
> 1667 struct mlx5e_priv *out_priv, *route_priv;
> 1668 struct mlx5_core_dev *route_mdev;
> 1669 struct mlx5_devcom *devcom;
> 1670 struct mlx5_eswitch *esw;
> 1671 u16 vhca_id;
> 1672 int err;
> 1673 int i;
> 1674
> 1675 out_priv = netdev_priv(out_dev);
> 1676 esw = out_priv->mdev->priv.eswitch;
> 1677 route_priv = netdev_priv(route_dev);
> 1678 route_mdev = route_priv->mdev;
> 1679
> 1680 vhca_id = MLX5_CAP_GEN(route_mdev, vhca_id);
> 1681 err = mlx5_eswitch_vhca_id_to_vport(esw, vhca_id, vport);
> 1682 if (!err)
> 1683 return err;
>
> This seems intentional but it look more intentional as "return 0;"
>
> 1684
> 1685 if (!mlx5_lag_is_active(out_priv->mdev))
> 1686 return err;
>
> return -ENOENT; here?
>
> 1687
> 1688 rcu_read_lock();
> 1689 devcom = out_priv->mdev->priv.devcom;
> 1690 err = -ENODEV;
> 1691 mlx5_devcom_for_each_peer_entry_rcu(devcom, MLX5_DEVCOM_ESW_OFFLOADS,
> 1692 esw, i) {
> 1693 err = mlx5_eswitch_vhca_id_to_vport(esw, vhca_id, vport);
> 1694 if (!err)
> 1695 break;
> 1696 }
> 1697 rcu_read_unlock();
> 1698
> 1699 return err;
> 1700 }
>
> [ snip ]
>
> 4727 int mlx5e_stats_flower(struct net_device *dev, struct mlx5e_priv *priv,
> 4728 struct flow_cls_offload *f, unsigned long flags)
> 4729 {
> 4730 struct mlx5_devcom *devcom = priv->mdev->priv.devcom;
> 4731 struct rhashtable *tc_ht = get_tc_ht(priv, flags);
> 4732 struct mlx5e_tc_flow *flow;
> 4733 struct mlx5_fc *counter;
> 4734 u64 lastuse = 0;
> 4735 u64 packets = 0;
> 4736 u64 bytes = 0;
> 4737 int err = 0;
> 4738
> 4739 rcu_read_lock();
> 4740 flow = mlx5e_flow_get(rhashtable_lookup(tc_ht, &f->cookie,
> 4741 tc_ht_params));
> 4742 rcu_read_unlock();
> 4743 if (IS_ERR(flow))
> 4744 return PTR_ERR(flow);
> 4745
> 4746 if (!same_flow_direction(flow, flags)) {
> 4747 err = -EINVAL;
> 4748 goto errout;
> 4749 }
> 4750
> 4751 if (mlx5e_is_offloaded_flow(flow)) {
> 4752 if (flow_flag_test(flow, USE_ACT_STATS)) {
> 4753 f->use_act_stats = true;
> 4754 } else {
> 4755 counter = mlx5e_tc_get_counter(flow);
> 4756 if (!counter)
> 4757 goto errout;
>
> No error code. In this function it's hard to say if these should be
> error paths or not.
>
> 4758
> 4759 mlx5_fc_query_cached(counter, &bytes, &packets, &lastuse);
> 4760 }
> 4761 }
> 4762
> 4763 /* Under multipath it's possible for one rule to be currently
> 4764 * un-offloaded while the other rule is offloaded.
> 4765 */
> 4766 if (!mlx5_devcom_for_each_peer_begin(devcom, MLX5_DEVCOM_ESW_OFFLOADS))
> 4767 goto out;
>
> No error code
>
> 4768
> 4769 if (flow_flag_test(flow, DUP)) {
> 4770 struct mlx5e_tc_flow *peer_flow;
> 4771
> 4772 list_for_each_entry(peer_flow, &flow->peer_flows, peer_flows) {
> 4773 u64 packets2;
> 4774 u64 lastuse2;
> 4775 u64 bytes2;
> 4776
> 4777 if (!flow_flag_test(peer_flow, OFFLOADED))
> 4778 continue;
> 4779 if (flow_flag_test(flow, USE_ACT_STATS)) {
> 4780 f->use_act_stats = true;
> 4781 break;
> 4782 }
> 4783
> 4784 counter = mlx5e_tc_get_counter(peer_flow);
> 4785 if (!counter)
> 4786 goto no_peer_counter;
>
> No error code
>
> 4787 mlx5_fc_query_cached(counter, &bytes2, &packets2,
> 4788 &lastuse2);
> 4789
> 4790 bytes += bytes2;
> 4791 packets += packets2;
> 4792 lastuse = max_t(u64, lastuse, lastuse2);
> 4793 }
> 4794 }
> 4795
> 4796 no_peer_counter:
> 4797 mlx5_devcom_for_each_peer_end(devcom, MLX5_DEVCOM_ESW_OFFLOADS);
> 4798 out:
> 4799 flow_stats_update(&f->stats, bytes, packets, 0, lastuse,
> 4800 FLOW_ACTION_HW_STATS_DELAYED);
> 4801 trace_mlx5e_stats_flower(f);
> 4802 errout:
> 4803 mlx5e_flow_put(priv, flow);
> 4804 return err;
> 4805 }
>
> [ snip ]
>
> 5627 int mlx5e_tc_action_miss_mapping_get(struct mlx5e_priv *priv, struct mlx5_flow_attr *attr,
> 5628 u64 act_miss_cookie, u32 *act_miss_mapping)
> 5629 {
> 5630 struct mlx5_mapped_obj mapped_obj = {};
> 5631 struct mlx5_eswitch *esw;
> 5632 struct mapping_ctx *ctx;
> 5633 int err;
> 5634
> 5635 ctx = mlx5e_get_priv_obj_mapping(priv);
> 5636 mapped_obj.type = MLX5_MAPPED_OBJ_ACT_MISS;
> 5637 mapped_obj.act_miss_cookie = act_miss_cookie;
> 5638 err = mapping_add(ctx, &mapped_obj, act_miss_mapping);
> 5639 if (err)
> 5640 return err;
> 5641
> 5642 if (!is_mdev_switchdev_mode(priv->mdev))
> 5643 return 0;
> 5644
> 5645 esw = priv->mdev->priv.eswitch;
> 5646 attr->act_id_restore_rule = esw_add_restore_rule(esw, *act_miss_mapping);
> 5647 if (IS_ERR(attr->act_id_restore_rule))
> 5648 goto err_rule;
>
> This one is definitely an error path.
>
> 5649
> 5650 return 0;
> 5651
> 5652 err_rule:
> 5653 mapping_remove(ctx, *act_miss_mapping);
> 5654 return err;
> 5655 }
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists