Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net] ice: fix unaligned access in ice_create_lag_recipe

["Zou, Steven" <steven.zou@intel.com>]

On 2/2/2024 9:01 PM, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 14:00:03 +0100
>
>> On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 01:40:18PM +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>> From: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:39:28 +0100
>>>
>>>> From: Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@redhat.com>
>>>> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:40:17 +0100
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/31/24 17:59, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>>>>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 13:17:44 +0100
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:58:23PM CET, mschmidt@redhat.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lag.c
>>>>>>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lag.c
>>>>>>>> index 2a25323105e5..d4848f6fe919 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lag.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lag.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -1829,9 +1829,7 @@ static int ice_create_lag_recipe(struct ice_hw
>>>>>>>> *hw, u16 *rid,
>>>>>>>>      new_rcp->content.act_ctrl_fwd_priority = prio;
>>>>>>>>      new_rcp->content.rid = *rid | ICE_AQ_RECIPE_ID_IS_ROOT;
>>>>>>>>      new_rcp->recipe_indx = *rid;
>>>>>>>> -    bitmap_zero((unsigned long *)new_rcp->recipe_bitmap,
>>>>>>>> -            ICE_MAX_NUM_RECIPES);
>>>>>>>> -    set_bit(*rid, (unsigned long *)new_rcp->recipe_bitmap);
>>>>>>>> +    put_unaligned_le64(BIT_ULL(*rid), new_rcp->recipe_bitmap);
>>>>>>> Looks like there might be another incorrect bitmap usage for this in
>>>>>>> ice_add_sw_recipe(). Care to fix it there as well?
>>>>>> Those are already fixed in one switchdev series and will be sent to IWL
>>>>>> soon.
>>>>>> I believe this patch would also make no sense after it's sent.
>>>>> Hi Alexander,
>>>>> When will the series be sent?
>>>>> The bug causes a kernel panic. Will the series target net.git?
>>>> The global fix is here: [0]
>>>> It's targeting net-next.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know what the best way here would be. Target net instead or pick
>>>> your fix to net and then fix it properly in net-next?
>>> Sorry, forgot to paste the link :clownface:
>> IMHO 1/2 should go to net. Then you would have to wait for it to got
>> accepted and get merged to -next and then you come back with 2/2. You know
>> the deal.
> Agree!
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> Could you please send the first patch from your series to net instead of
> net-next?
>
> (and add "Fixes:" tag with the blamed commit)

Hi Olek,
Sure, I will do it soon.

>
>>> [0]
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/intel-wired-lan/20240130025146.30265-2-steven.zou@intel.com
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Olek
> Thanks,
> Olek
-- 

Best Regards,
Steven