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: <20230817112738.GH22185@unreal> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 14:27:38 +0300 From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> To: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com> Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Piotr Gardocki <piotrx.gardocki@...el.com>, Rafal Romanowski <rafal.romanowski@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] iavf: fix FDIR rule fields masks validation On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 12:33:07PM -0700, Tony Nguyen wrote: > From: Piotr Gardocki <piotrx.gardocki@...el.com> > > Return an error if a field's mask is neither full nor empty. When a mask > is only partial the field is not being used for rule programming but it > gives a wrong impression it is used. Fix by returning an error on any > partial mask to make it clear they are not supported. > The ip_ver assignment is moved earlier in code to allow using it in > iavf_validate_fdir_fltr_masks. > > Fixes: 527691bf0682 ("iavf: Support IPv4 Flow Director filters") > Fixes: e90cbc257a6f ("iavf: Support IPv6 Flow Director filters") > Signed-off-by: Piotr Gardocki <piotrx.gardocki@...el.com> > Tested-by: Rafal Romanowski <rafal.romanowski@...el.com> > Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com> > --- > .../net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_ethtool.c | 10 +++ > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_fdir.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_fdir.h | 2 + > 3 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) <...> > +static const struct in6_addr ipv6_addr_zero_mask = { > + .in6_u = { > + .u6_addr8 = { > + 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, > + } > + } > +}; > + Static variables are zeroed by default, there is no need in direct assignment of 0s. Thanks, Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists