[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zbt9JmpDq3cAbq1b@dcaratti.users.ipa.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 12:14:46 +0100
From: Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, 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>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>, Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net/sched: cls_flower: add support for
matching tunnel control flags
hello Jamal, thanks for looking at this!
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 04:13:25PM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 11:16 AM Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > extend cls_flower to match flags belonging to 'TUNNEL_FLAGS_PRESENT' mask
> > inside skb tunnel metadata.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org>
> > Signed-off-by: Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>
[...]
> > @@ -1748,6 +1753,21 @@ static int fl_set_key_cfm(struct nlattr **tb,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int fl_set_key_enc_flags(struct nlattr **tb, __be16 *flags_key,
> > + __be16 *flags_mask, struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> > +{
> > + /* mask is mandatory for flags */
> > + if (!tb[TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS_MASK]) {
>
> if (NL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(extack,...))
>
> > + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "missing enc_flags mask");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
right, I will change it in the v2.
[...]
> > @@ -1986,6 +2006,10 @@ static int fl_set_key(struct net *net, struct nlattr **tb,
> > ret = fl_set_key_flags(tb, &key->control.flags,
> > &mask->control.flags, extack);
> >
> > + if (tb[TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS])
>
> And here..
>
> cheers,
> jamal
>
> > + ret = fl_set_key_enc_flags(tb, &key->enc_flags.flags,
> > + &mask->enc_flags.flags, extack);
> > +
> > return ret;
here I don't see any advantage in doing
if (!NL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(extack, NULL, tb, TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS))
ret = fl_set_key_enc_flags(tb, ... );
return ret;
the attribute is not mandatory, so a call to NL_SET_ERR_ATTR_MISS()
would do a useless/misleading assignment in extack->miss_type.
However, thanks for bringing the attention here :) At a second look,
this hunk introduces a bug: in case the parsing of TCA_FLOWER_KEY_FLAGS
fails, 'ret' is -EINVAL. If attributes TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS +
TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS_MASK are good to go, 'ret' will be overwritten
with 0 and flower will accept the rule... this is not intentional :)
will fix this in the v2.
--
davide
Powered by blists - more mailing lists