netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ethernet: rocker: Use is_broadcast_ether_addr() and is_multicast_ether_addr() instead of ether_addr

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: <ZNncFhibJLTLr5Q6@vergenet.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 09:47:34 +0200
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Ruan Jinjie <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ethernet: rocker: Use is_broadcast_ether_addr()
 and is_multicast_ether_addr() instead of ether_addr_equal()

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 10:29:48AM +0800, Ruan Jinjie wrote:
> Use is_broadcast_ether_addr() and is_multicast_ether_addr() instead of
> ether_addr_equal() to check if the ethernet address is broadcast
> and multicast address separately.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ruan Jinjie <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>

Hi,

Perhaps we could go for a more concise prefix and subject, as the current one
is rather long. Maybe something like:

Subject: [PATCH net-next]: rocker: Use helpers to check broadcast and multicast Ether addresses

> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker_ofdpa.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker_ofdpa.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker_ofdpa.c
> index 826990459fa4..7f389f3adbf4 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker_ofdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker_ofdpa.c
> @@ -208,7 +208,6 @@ static const u8 zero_mac[ETH_ALEN]   = { 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00 };
>  static const u8 ff_mac[ETH_ALEN]     = { 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff };
>  static const u8 ll_mac[ETH_ALEN]     = { 0x01, 0x80, 0xc2, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00 };
>  static const u8 ll_mask[ETH_ALEN]    = { 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xf0 };
> -static const u8 mcast_mac[ETH_ALEN]  = { 0x01, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00 };
>  static const u8 ipv4_mcast[ETH_ALEN] = { 0x01, 0x00, 0x5e, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00 };
>  static const u8 ipv4_mask[ETH_ALEN]  = { 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0x80, 0x00, 0x00 };
>  static const u8 ipv6_mcast[ETH_ALEN] = { 0x33, 0x33, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00 };
> @@ -939,7 +938,7 @@ static int ofdpa_flow_tbl_bridge(struct ofdpa_port *ofdpa_port,
>  	if (eth_dst_mask) {
>  		entry->key.bridge.has_eth_dst_mask = 1;
>  		ether_addr_copy(entry->key.bridge.eth_dst_mask, eth_dst_mask);
> -		if (!ether_addr_equal(eth_dst_mask, ff_mac))
> +		if (!is_broadcast_ether_addr(eth_dst_mask))

Probably it is ok, but is_broadcast_ether_addr()
covers a set of addresses that includes ff_mac.

>  			wild = true;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1012,7 +1011,7 @@ static int ofdpa_flow_tbl_acl(struct ofdpa_port *ofdpa_port, int flags,
>  
>  	priority = OFDPA_PRIORITY_ACL_NORMAL;
>  	if (eth_dst && eth_dst_mask) {
> -		if (ether_addr_equal(eth_dst_mask, mcast_mac))
> +		if (is_multicast_ether_addr(eth_dst_mask))

Likewise, is_multicast_ether_addr()
covers a set of addresses that includes mcast_mac.

>  			priority = OFDPA_PRIORITY_ACL_DFLT;
>  		else if (is_link_local_ether_addr(eth_dst))
>  			priority = OFDPA_PRIORITY_ACL_CTRL;
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
>