2024-04-10 09:38:29

by Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] flower: validate control flags

I have reviewed the flower control flags code.
In all, but one (sfc), the flags field wasn't
checked properly for unsupported flags.

In this series I have only included a single example
user for each helper function. Once the helpers are in,
I will submit patches for all other drivers implementing
flower.

After which there will be:
- 6 drivers using flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()
- 8 drivers using flow_rule_has_control_flags()
- 11 drivers using flow_rule_match_has_control_flags()

v2:
- squashed the 3 helper functions to one commmit (requested by Baowen Zheng)
- renamed helper functions to avoid double negatives (suggested by Louis Peens)
- reverse booleans in some functions and callsites to align with new names
- fix autodoc format

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/[email protected]/

Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen (4):
flow_offload: add control flag checking helpers
nfp: flower: fix check for unsupported control flags
net: prestera: flower: validate control flags
net: dsa: microchip: ksz9477: flower: validate control flags

drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477_tc_flower.c | 3 +
.../marvell/prestera/prestera_flower.c | 4 ++
.../ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c | 6 +-
include/net/flow_offload.h | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--
2.43.0



2024-04-10 09:38:53

by Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 1/4] flow_offload: add control flag checking helpers

These helpers aim to help drivers, with checking
for the presence of unsupported control flags.

For drivers supporting at least one control flag:
flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()

For drivers using flow_rule_match_control(), but not using flags:
flow_rule_has_control_flags()

For drivers not using flow_rule_match_control():
flow_rule_match_has_control_flags()

While primarily aimed at FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL
and flow_rule_match_control(), then the first two
can also be used with FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ENC_CONTROL
and flow_rule_match_enc_control().

These helpers mirrors the existing check done in sfc:
drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/tc.c +276

Only compile-tested.

Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <[email protected]>
---
include/net/flow_offload.h | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 55 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/net/flow_offload.h b/include/net/flow_offload.h
index 314087a5e1818..9ee3ad4a308a8 100644
--- a/include/net/flow_offload.h
+++ b/include/net/flow_offload.h
@@ -449,6 +449,61 @@ static inline bool flow_rule_match_key(const struct flow_rule *rule,
return dissector_uses_key(rule->match.dissector, key);
}

+/**
+ * flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() - check for supported control flags
+ * @supp_flags: control flags supported by driver
+ * @ctrl_flags: control flags present in rule
+ * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
+ *
+ * @returns true if only supported control flags are set, false otherwise.
+ */
+static inline bool flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(const u32 supp_flags,
+ const u32 ctrl_flags,
+ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
+{
+ if (likely((ctrl_flags & ~supp_flags) == 0))
+ return true;
+
+ NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(extack,
+ "Unsupported match on control.flags %#x",
+ ctrl_flags);
+
+ return false;
+}
+
+/**
+ * flow_rule_has_control_flags() - check for presence of any control flags
+ * @ctrl_flags: control flags present in rule
+ * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
+ *
+ * @returns true if control flags are set, false otherwise.
+ */
+static inline bool flow_rule_has_control_flags(const u32 ctrl_flags,
+ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
+{
+ return !flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(0, ctrl_flags, extack);
+}
+
+/**
+ * flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() - match and check for any control flags
+ * @rule: The flow_rule under evaluation.
+ * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
+ *
+ * @returns true if control flags are set, false otherwise.
+ */
+static inline bool flow_rule_match_has_control_flags(struct flow_rule *rule,
+ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
+{
+ struct flow_match_control match;
+
+ if (!flow_rule_match_key(rule, FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL))
+ return false;
+
+ flow_rule_match_control(rule, &match);
+
+ return flow_rule_has_control_flags(match.mask->flags, extack);
+}
+
struct flow_stats {
u64 pkts;
u64 bytes;
--
2.43.0


2024-04-10 09:39:43

by Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 2/4] nfp: flower: fix check for unsupported control flags

Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()

Check the mask, not the key, for unsupported control flags.

Only compile-tested, no access to HW

Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c
index 0aceef9fe5826..8e0a890381b60 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c
@@ -527,10 +527,10 @@ nfp_flower_calculate_key_layers(struct nfp_app *app,
struct flow_match_control ctl;

flow_rule_match_control(rule, &ctl);
- if (ctl.key->flags & ~NFP_FLOWER_SUPPORTED_CTLFLAGS) {
- NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "unsupported offload: match on unknown control flag");
+
+ if (!flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(NFP_FLOWER_SUPPORTED_CTLFLAGS,
+ ctl.mask->flags, extack))
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
- }
}

ret_key_ls->key_layer = key_layer;
--
2.43.0


2024-04-10 11:49:40

by Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/4] flow_offload: add control flag checking helpers

On 4/10/24 9:32 AM, Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen wrote:
> These helpers aim to help drivers, with checking
> for the presence of unsupported control flags.
>
> For drivers supporting at least one control flag:
> flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()
>
> For drivers using flow_rule_match_control(), but not using flags:
> flow_rule_has_control_flags()
>
> For drivers not using flow_rule_match_control():
> flow_rule_match_has_control_flags()
>
> While primarily aimed at FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL
> and flow_rule_match_control(), then the first two
> can also be used with FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ENC_CONTROL
> and flow_rule_match_enc_control().
>
> These helpers mirrors the existing check done in sfc:
> drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/tc.c +276
>
> Only compile-tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <[email protected]>
> ---
> include/net/flow_offload.h | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/flow_offload.h b/include/net/flow_offload.h
> index 314087a5e1818..9ee3ad4a308a8 100644
> --- a/include/net/flow_offload.h
> +++ b/include/net/flow_offload.h
> @@ -449,6 +449,61 @@ static inline bool flow_rule_match_key(const struct flow_rule *rule,
> return dissector_uses_key(rule->match.dissector, key);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() - check for supported control flags
> + * @supp_flags: control flags supported by driver
> + * @ctrl_flags: control flags present in rule
> + * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
> + *
> + * @returns true if only supported control flags are set, false otherwise.
> + */


The kdoc test failed:
> include/net/flow_offload.h:463: warning: No description found for return value of 'flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags'

For some reason I didn't find kernel-doc.rst, because I searched for autodoc sphinx stuff.

Will do proper "Return:" in v3.

I wasn't able to reproduce the kdoc failure[1] locally:

$ ./scripts/kernel-doc -none include/net/flow_offload.h
$ ./scripts/kernel-doc -none -v include/net/flow_offload.h
include/net/flow_offload.h:345: info: Scanning doc for function flow_offload_has_one_action
include/net/flow_offload.h:453: info: Scanning doc for function flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags
include/net/flow_offload.h:475: info: Scanning doc for function flow_rule_has_control_flags
include/net/flow_offload.h:488: info: Scanning doc for function flow_rule_match_has_control_flags

[1] https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/static/nipa/843159/13623977/kdoc/

pw-bot: changes-requested


> +static inline bool flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(const u32 supp_flags,
> + const u32 ctrl_flags,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + if (likely((ctrl_flags & ~supp_flags) == 0))
> + return true;
> +
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(extack,
> + "Unsupported match on control.flags %#x",
> + ctrl_flags);
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * flow_rule_has_control_flags() - check for presence of any control flags
> + * @ctrl_flags: control flags present in rule
> + * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
> + *
> + * @returns true if control flags are set, false otherwise.
> + */
> +static inline bool flow_rule_has_control_flags(const u32 ctrl_flags,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + return !flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(0, ctrl_flags, extack);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * flow_rule_match_has_control_flags() - match and check for any control flags
> + * @rule: The flow_rule under evaluation.
> + * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
> + *
> + * @returns true if control flags are set, false otherwise.
> + */
> +static inline bool flow_rule_match_has_control_flags(struct flow_rule *rule,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + struct flow_match_control match;
> +
> + if (!flow_rule_match_key(rule, FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL))
> + return false;
> +
> + flow_rule_match_control(rule, &match);
> +
> + return flow_rule_has_control_flags(match.mask->flags, extack);
> +}
> +
> struct flow_stats {
> u64 pkts;
> u64 bytes;

--
Best regards
Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
Network Engineer
Fiberby - AS42541

2024-04-11 06:26:24

by Louis Peens

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/4] flow_offload: add control flag checking helpers

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 09:32:22AM +0000, Asbj?rn Sloth T?nnesen wrote:
> These helpers aim to help drivers, with checking
> for the presence of unsupported control flags.
>
> For drivers supporting at least one control flag:
> flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()
>
> For drivers using flow_rule_match_control(), but not using flags:
> flow_rule_has_control_flags()
>
> For drivers not using flow_rule_match_control():
> flow_rule_match_has_control_flags()
>
> While primarily aimed at FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL
> and flow_rule_match_control(), then the first two
> can also be used with FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ENC_CONTROL
> and flow_rule_match_enc_control().
>
> These helpers mirrors the existing check done in sfc:
> drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/tc.c +276
>
> Only compile-tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Asbj?rn Sloth T?nnesen <[email protected]>
> ---

Looks good from my perspective, thanks for the naming updates:
Reviewed-by: Louis Peens <[email protected]>

2024-04-11 07:00:56

by Louis Peens

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/4] nfp: flower: fix check for unsupported control flags

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 09:32:23AM +0000, Asbj?rn Sloth T?nnesen wrote:
> Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()
>
> Check the mask, not the key, for unsupported control flags.
>
> Only compile-tested, no access to HW
>
> Signed-off-by: Asbj?rn Sloth T?nnesen <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Thanks for updating:
Reviewed-by: Louis Peens <[email protected]>