netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next 11/23] ice: use VLAN proto from ring packet context in skb path

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]

Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 18:30:32 +0200
From: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
CC: <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <ast@...nel.org>, <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	<andrii@...nel.org>, <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, <song@...nel.org>, <yhs@...com>,
	<john.fastabend@...il.com>, <kpsingh@...nel.org>, <sdf@...gle.com>,
	<haoluo@...gle.com>, <jolsa@...nel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>, Anatoly Burakov
	<anatoly.burakov@...el.com>, Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
	Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>, Maryam Tahhan
	<mtahhan@...hat.com>, <xdp-hints@...-project.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, Alexei Starovoitov
	<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
	Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next 11/23] ice: use VLAN proto from ring packet context
 in skb path

From: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 21:26:50 +0200

> VLAN proto, used in ice XDP hints implementation is stored in ring packet
> context. Utilize this value in skb VLAN processing too instead of checking
> netdev features.
> 
> At the same time, use vlan_tci instead of vlan_tag in touched code,
> because vlan_tag is misleading.

[...]

>  void
> -ice_receive_skb(struct ice_rx_ring *rx_ring, struct sk_buff *skb, u16 vlan_tag)
> +ice_receive_skb(struct ice_rx_ring *rx_ring, struct sk_buff *skb, u16 vlan_tci)
>  {
> -	netdev_features_t features = rx_ring->netdev->features;
> -	bool non_zero_vlan = !!(vlan_tag & VLAN_VID_MASK);
> -
> -	if ((features & NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_CTAG_RX) && non_zero_vlan)
> -		__vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, htons(ETH_P_8021Q), vlan_tag);
> -	else if ((features & NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_STAG_RX) && non_zero_vlan)
> -		__vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, htons(ETH_P_8021AD), vlan_tag);
> +	if (vlan_tci & VLAN_VID_MASK && rx_ring->pkt_ctx.vlan_proto)

I'd wrap the first expression into ()s to make it more readable (and no
questions like "shouldn't these be three &&?").

> +		__vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, rx_ring->pkt_ctx.vlan_proto,
> +				       vlan_tci);
>  
>  	napi_gro_receive(&rx_ring->q_vector->napi, skb);
>  }

[...]

Thanks,
Olek