From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next] xfrm: check for xdo_dev_state_free
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:20:20 +0100
Message-ID: <20171214062020.wj6iglgcfpu2b7kh@gauss3.secunet.de>
References: <1513025842-12064-1-git-send-email-shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
To: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:57878 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1750720AbdLNGUd (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 14 Dec 2017 01:20:33 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1513025842-12064-1-git-send-email-shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 12:57:22PM -0800, Shannon Nelson wrote:
> The current XFRM code assumes that we've implemented the
> xdo_dev_state_free() callback, even if it is meaningless to the driver.
> This patch adds a check for it before calling, as done in other APIs,
> and is done for the xdo_state_offload_ok() callback.
> 
> Also, we add a check for the required add and delete functions up front
> at registration time to be sure both are defined, and complain if not.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@oracle.com>
> ---
>  include/net/xfrm.h     |  3 ++-
>  net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c | 18 ++++++++++++++----
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/net/xfrm.h b/include/net/xfrm.h
> index e015e16..dfabd04 100644
> --- a/include/net/xfrm.h
> +++ b/include/net/xfrm.h
> @@ -1891,7 +1891,8 @@ static inline void xfrm_dev_state_free(struct xfrm_state *x)
>  	 struct net_device *dev = xso->dev;
>  
>  	if (dev && dev->xfrmdev_ops) {
> -		dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free(x);
> +		if (dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free)
> +			dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free(x);
>  		xso->dev = NULL;
>  		dev_put(dev);
>  	}
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> index 30e5746..0df1cc2 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> @@ -144,11 +144,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xfrm_dev_offload_ok);
>  
>  static int xfrm_dev_register(struct net_device *dev)
>  {
> -	if ((dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP) && !dev->xfrmdev_ops)
> -		return NOTIFY_BAD;
> -	if ((dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP_TX_CSUM) &&
> -	    !(dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP))
> +	if (!(dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP)) {
> +		if (dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP_TX_CSUM) {
> +			netdev_err(dev, "NETIF_F_HW_ESP_TX_CSUM without NETIF_F_HW_ESP\n");
> +			return NOTIFY_BAD;
> +		} else {
> +			return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!(dev->xfrmdev_ops &&
> +	      dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_add &&
> +	      dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_delete)) {
> +		netdev_err(dev, "add or delete function missing from xfrmdev_ops\n");

Please remove these error printings, this is not relevant for normal
users.