From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D671C433DF for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 20:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C59D208C3 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 20:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731512AbgFPUNy (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:13:54 -0400 Received: from correo.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:36412 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729167AbgFPUNx (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:13:53 -0400 Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (unknown [192.168.2.11]) by mail.us.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0BCF2367 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF22DA722 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix, from userid 99) id 1494DDA78C; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB729DA798; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 192.168.1.97 (192.168.1.97) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/antivirus1-rhel7.int); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/antivirus1-rhel7.int) Received: from us.es (unknown [90.77.255.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: 1984lsi) by entrada.int (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B714F426CCB9; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:48 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:13:48 +0200 X-SMTPAUTHUS: auth mail.us.es From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: wenxu@ucloud.cn Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, vladbu@mellanox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3 2/4] flow_offload: fix incorrect cb_priv check for flow_block_cb Message-ID: <20200616201348.GB26932@salvia> References: <1592277580-5524-1-git-send-email-wenxu@ucloud.cn> <1592277580-5524-3-git-send-email-wenxu@ucloud.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1592277580-5524-3-git-send-email-wenxu@ucloud.cn> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 11:19:38AM +0800, wenxu@ucloud.cn wrote: > From: wenxu > > In the function __flow_block_indr_cleanup, The match stataments > this->cb_priv == cb_priv is always false, the flow_block_cb->cb_priv > is totally different data with the flow_indr_dev->cb_priv. > > Store the representor cb_priv to the flow_block_cb->indr.cb_priv in > the driver. > > Fixes: 1fac52da5942 ("net: flow_offload: consolidate indirect flow_block infrastructure") > Signed-off-by: wenxu > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_tc.c | 1 + > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/rep/tc.c | 2 +- > drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c | 1 + > include/net/flow_offload.h | 1 + > net/core/flow_offload.c | 2 +- > 5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_tc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_tc.c > index ef7f6bc..042c285 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_tc.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_tc.c > @@ -1918,6 +1918,7 @@ static int bnxt_tc_setup_indr_block(struct net_device *netdev, struct bnxt *bp, > > flow_block_cb_add(block_cb, f); > list_add_tail(&block_cb->driver_list, &bnxt_block_cb_list); > + block_cb->indr.cb_priv = bp; cb_indent ? Why are you splitting the fix in multiple patches? This makes it harder to review. I think patch 1/4, 2/4 and 4/4 belong to the same logical change? Collapse them.