[PATCH net-next v2 0/3] net: lan966x: flower: validate control flags

[PATCH net-next v2 0/3] net: lan966x: flower: validate control flags

[Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen]

This series adds flower control flags validation to the
lan966x driver, and changes it from assuming that it handles
all control flags, to instead reject rules if they have
masked any unknown/unsupported control flags.

---
Changelog:

v2:
* Split first patch into 2 (requested by Jiri)
* Added cover letter (requested by Simon)

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240423102720.228728-1-ast@fiberby.net/

Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen (3):
  net: lan966x: flower: add extack to
    lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()
  net: lan966x: flower: rename goto in
    lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()
  net: lan966x: flower: check for unsupported control flags

 .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 14 ++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

-- 
2.43.0

[PATCH net-next v2 1/3] net: lan966x: flower: add extack to lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()

[Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen]

Define extack locally, to reduce line lengths and aid future users.

Only compile-tested.

Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
index d696cf9dbd19..a63b83fa2823 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ static bool lan966x_tc_is_known_etype(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st,
 static int
 lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
 {
+	struct netlink_ext_ack *extack = st->fco->common.extack;
 	struct flow_match_control match;
 	int err = 0;
 
@@ -80,7 +81,7 @@ lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
 	return err;
 
 out:
-	NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(st->fco->common.extack, "ip_frag parse error");
+	NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "ip_frag parse error");
 	return err;
 }
 
-- 
2.43.0

[PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: lan966x: flower: rename goto in lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()

[Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen]

Rename goto label, as the error message is specific to the fragment flags.

Only compile-tested.

Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
index a63b83fa2823..8baec0cd8d95 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
 						    VCAP_KF_L3_FRAGMENT,
 						    VCAP_BIT_0);
 		if (err)
-			goto out;
+			goto bad_frag_out;
 	}
 
 	if (match.mask->flags & FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG) {
@@ -73,14 +73,14 @@ lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
 						    VCAP_KF_L3_FRAG_OFS_GT0,
 						    VCAP_BIT_1);
 		if (err)
-			goto out;
+			goto bad_frag_out;
 	}
 
 	st->used_keys |= BIT_ULL(FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL);
 
 	return err;
 
-out:
+bad_frag_out:
 	NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "ip_frag parse error");
 	return err;
 }
-- 
2.43.0

[PATCH net-next v2 3/3] net: lan966x: flower: check for unsupported control flags

[Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen]

Use flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() to reject filters with
unsupported control flags.

In case any unsupported control flags are masked,
flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags() sets a NL extended
error message, and we return -EOPNOTSUPP.

Only compile-tested.

Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@fiberby.net>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
index 8baec0cd8d95..43913d6204e1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c
@@ -76,6 +76,11 @@ lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage(struct vcap_tc_flower_parse_usage *st)
 			goto bad_frag_out;
 	}
 
+	if (!flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags(FLOW_DIS_IS_FRAGMENT |
+					     FLOW_DIS_FIRST_FRAG,
+					     match.mask->flags, extack))
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
 	st->used_keys |= BIT_ULL(FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_CONTROL);
 
 	return err;
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/3] net: lan966x: flower: validate control flags

[Jiri Pirko]

Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 02:53:37PM CEST, ast@fiberby.net wrote:
>This series adds flower control flags validation to the
>lan966x driver, and changes it from assuming that it handles
>all control flags, to instead reject rules if they have
>masked any unknown/unsupported control flags.
>
>---
>Changelog:
>
>v2:
>* Split first patch into 2 (requested by Jiri)
>* Added cover letter (requested by Simon)

set-
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>

Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/3] net: lan966x: flower: validate control flags

[Horatiu Vultur]

The 04/24/2024 12:53, Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen wrote:
> 
> This series adds flower control flags validation to the
> lan966x driver, and changes it from assuming that it handles
> all control flags, to instead reject rules if they have
> masked any unknown/unsupported control flags.

For the entire series:
Reviewed-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
> 
> ---
> Changelog:
> 
> v2:
> * Split first patch into 2 (requested by Jiri)
> * Added cover letter (requested by Simon)
> 
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240423102720.228728-1-ast@fiberby.net/
> 
> Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen (3):
>   net: lan966x: flower: add extack to
>     lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()
>   net: lan966x: flower: rename goto in
>     lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()
>   net: lan966x: flower: check for unsupported control flags
> 
>  .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_tc_flower.c | 14 ++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 2.43.0
> 

-- 
/Horatiu

Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/3] net: lan966x: flower: validate control flags

[patchwork-bot+netdevbpf]

Hello:

This series was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 12:53:37 +0000 you wrote:
> This series adds flower control flags validation to the
> lan966x driver, and changes it from assuming that it handles
> all control flags, to instead reject rules if they have
> masked any unknown/unsupported control flags.
> 
> ---
> Changelog:
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [net-next,v2,1/3] net: lan966x: flower: add extack to lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/505ccf890c21
  - [net-next,v2,2/3] net: lan966x: flower: rename goto in lan966x_tc_flower_handler_control_usage()
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/12b8e129c409
  - [net-next,v2,3/3] net: lan966x: flower: check for unsupported control flags
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/8c65e27b42fc

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html