* [PATCH net v3] net: sparx5: flower: fix fragment flags handling
@ 2024-04-11 11:13 Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
2024-04-13 2:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen @ 2024-04-11 11:13 UTC (permalink / raw
To: netdev
Cc: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen, Steen Hegelund, Lars Povlsen,
Daniel Machon, UNGLinuxDriver, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet,
Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni, linux-kernel, Jacob Keller
I noticed that only 3 out of the 4 input bits were used,
mt.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT was never checked.
In order to avoid a complicated maze, I converted it to
use a 16 byte mapping table.
As shown in the table below the old heuristics doesn't
always do the right thing, ie. when FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT=1/1
then it used to only match follow-up fragment packets.
Here are all the combinations, and their resulting new/old
VCAP key/mask filter:
/- FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT (key/mask)
| /- FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG (key/mask)
| | /-- new VCAP fragment (key/mask)
v v v v- old VCAP fragment (key/mask)
0/0 0/0 -/- -/- impossible (due to entry cond. on mask)
0/0 0/1 -/- 0/3 !! invalid (can't match non-fragment + follow-up frag)
0/0 1/0 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
0/0 1/1 1/3 1/3 first fragment
0/1 0/0 0/3 3/3 !! not fragmented
0/1 0/1 0/3 3/3 !! not fragmented (+ not first fragment)
0/1 1/0 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
0/1 1/1 -/- 1/3 !! invalid (non-fragment and first frag)
1/0 0/0 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
1/0 0/1 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
1/0 1/0 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
1/0 1/1 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
1/1 0/0 1/1 3/3 !! some fragment
1/1 0/1 3/3 3/3 follow-up fragment
1/1 1/0 -/- -/- impossible (key > mask)
1/1 1/1 1/3 1/3 first fragment
In the datasheet the VCAP fragment values are documented as:
0 = no fragment
1 = initial fragment
2 = suspicious fragment
3 = valid follow-up fragment
Result: 3 combinations match the old behavior,
3 combinations have been corrected,
2 combinations are now invalid, and fail,
8 combinations are impossible.
It should now be aligned with how FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT
and FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG is set in __skb_flow_dissect() in
net/core/flow_dissector.c
Since the VCAP fragment values are not a bitfield, we have
to ignore the suspicious fragment value, eg. when matching
on any kind of fragment with FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT=1/1.
Only compile tested, and logic tested in userspace, as I
unfortunately don't have access to this switch chip (yet).
Fixes: d6c2964db3fe ("net: microchip: sparx5: Adding more tc flower keys for the IS2 VCAP")
Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
Reviewed-by: Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@microchip.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
---
Changelog:
v3:
- Added Reviewed-by from Jacob Keller.
- Start NL msg and comments with uppercase (requested by Daniel)
v2: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240410095224.6372-1-ast@fiberby.net/
- Improved in-line documentation of mapping table (requested by Steen)
- Relocated enum and mapping table (requested by Steen)
- Added Reviewed-by from Steen Hegelund
- Added Tested-by from Daniel Machon
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240408172738.96447-1-ast@fiberby.net/
.../microchip/sparx5/sparx5_tc_flower.c | 61 ++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_tc_flower.c
index 523e0c470894f..55f255a3c9db6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_tc_flower.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_tc_flower.c
@@ -36,6 +36,27 @@ struct sparx5_tc_flower_template {
u16 l3_proto; /* protocol specified in the template */
};
+/* SparX-5 VCAP fragment types:
+ * 0 = no fragment, 1 = initial fragment,
+ * 2 = suspicious fragment, 3 = valid follow-up fragment
+ */
+enum { /* key / mask */
+ FRAG_NOT = 0x03, /* 0 / 3 */
+ FRAG_SOME = 0x11, /* 1 / 1 */
+ FRAG_FIRST = 0x13, /* 1 / 3 */
+ FRAG_LATER = 0x33, /* 3 / 3 */
+ FRAG_INVAL = 0xff, /* invalid */
+};
+
+/* Flower fragment flag to VCAP fragment type mapping */
+static const u8 sparx5_vcap_frag_map[4][4] = { /* is_frag */
+ { FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_FIRST }, /* 0/0 */
+ { FRAG_NOT, FRAG_NOT, FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_INVAL }, /* 0/1 */
+ { FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_INVAL }, /* 1/0 */
+ { FRAG_SOME, FRAG_LATER, FRAG_INVAL, FRAG_FIRST } /* 1/1 */
+ /* 0/0 0/1 1/0 1/1 <-- first_frag */
+};
+
static int
sparx5_tc_flower_es0_tpid(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
{
@@ -145,29 +166,27 @@ sparx5_tc_flower_handler_control_usage(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
flow_rule_match_control(st->frule, &mt);
if (mt.mask->flags) {
- if (mt.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG) {
- if (mt.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG) {
- value = 1; /* initial fragment */
- mask = 0x3;
- } else {
- if (mt.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT) {
- value = 3; /* follow up fragment */
- mask = 0x3;
- } else {
- value = 0; /* no fragment */
- mask = 0x3;
- }
- }
- } else {
- if (mt.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT) {
- value = 3; /* follow up fragment */
- mask = 0x3;
- } else {
- value = 0; /* no fragment */
- mask = 0x3;
- }
+ u8 is_frag_key = !!(mt.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT);
+ u8 is_frag_mask = !!(mt.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT);
+ u8 is_frag_idx = (is_frag_key << 1) | is_frag_mask;
+
+ u8 first_frag_key = !!(mt.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG);
+ u8 first_frag_mask = !!(mt.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG);
+ u8 first_frag_idx = (first_frag_key << 1) | first_frag_mask;
+
+ /* Lookup verdict based on the 2 + 2 input bits */
+ u8 vdt = sparx5_vcap_frag_map[is_frag_idx][first_frag_idx];
+
+ if (vdt == FRAG_INVAL) {
+ NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(st->fco->common.extack,
+ "Match on invalid fragment flag combination");
+ return -EINVAL;
}
+ /* Extract VCAP fragment key and mask from verdict */
+ value = (vdt >> 4) & 0x3;
+ mask = vdt & 0x3;
+
err = vcap_rule_add_key_u32(st->vrule,
VCAP_KF_L3_FRAGMENT_TYPE,
value, mask);
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net v3] net: sparx5: flower: fix fragment flags handling
2024-04-11 11:13 [PATCH net v3] net: sparx5: flower: fix fragment flags handling Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
@ 2024-04-13 2:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2024-04-13 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw
To: =?utf-8?b?QXNiasO4cm4gU2xvdGggVMO4bm5lc2VuIDxhc3RAZmliZXJieS5uZXQ+?=
Cc: netdev, Steen.Hegelund, lars.povlsen, daniel.machon,
UNGLinuxDriver, davem, edumazet, kuba, pabeni, linux-kernel,
jacob.e.keller
Hello:
This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:13:18 +0000 you wrote:
> I noticed that only 3 out of the 4 input bits were used,
> mt.key->flags & FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT was never checked.
>
> In order to avoid a complicated maze, I converted it to
> use a 16 byte mapping table.
>
> As shown in the table below the old heuristics doesn't
> always do the right thing, ie. when FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT=1/1
> then it used to only match follow-up fragment packets.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net,v3] net: sparx5: flower: fix fragment flags handling
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/68aba00483c7
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-04-13 2:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-04-11 11:13 [PATCH net v3] net: sparx5: flower: fix fragment flags handling Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
2024-04-13 2:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).