netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v7 09/12] virtio_net: Implement IPv4 ethtool flow rules

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: <8959bbcd-8845-439b-b986-e1d7007e3adf@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 11:04:35 -0600
From: Dan Jurgens <danielj@...dia.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, mst@...hat.com, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, parav@...dia.com,
 shshitrit@...dia.com, yohadt@...dia.com, xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com,
 eperezma@...hat.com, shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com, jgg@...pe.ca,
 kevin.tian@...el.com, kuba@...nel.org, andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
 edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 09/12] virtio_net: Implement IPv4 ethtool flow
 rules

On 11/3/25 10:35 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 6:56 AM Daniel Jurgens <danielj@...dia.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add support for IP_USER type rules from ethtool.
>>
>> Example:
>> $ ethtool -U ens9 flow-type ip4 src-ip 192.168.51.101 action -1
>> Added rule with ID 1
>>
>> The example rule will drop packets with the source IP specified.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Jurgens <danielj@...dia.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Shahar Shitrit <shshitrit@...dia.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>
>> ---

>>
>> -       memcpy(eth_m, &fs->m_u.ether_spec, sizeof(*eth_m));
>> -       memcpy(eth_k, &fs->h_u.ether_spec, sizeof(*eth_k));
>> +       if (num_hdrs > 1) {
>> +               eth_m->h_proto = cpu_to_be16(0xffff);
>> +               eth_k->h_proto = cpu_to_be16(ETH_P_IP);
> 
> Do we need to check IPV6 here?

That comes in a subsequent patch. None of this is actually reachable
until we set the get operations in the last patch. So I think it's fine.

> 
> Thanks
>