lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Apr]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Subject[PATCH net-next v2 0/4] flower: validate control flags
Date
I have reviewed the flower control flags code.
In all, but one (sfc), the flags field wasn't
checked properly for unsupported flags.

In this series I have only included a single example
user for each helper function. Once the helpers are in,
I will submit patches for all other drivers implementing
flower.

After which there will be:
- 6 drivers using flow_rule_is_supp_control_flags()
- 8 drivers using flow_rule_has_control_flags()
- 11 drivers using flow_rule_match_has_control_flags()

v2:
- squashed the 3 helper functions to one commmit (requested by Baowen Zheng)
- renamed helper functions to avoid double negatives (suggested by Louis Peens)
- reverse booleans in some functions and callsites to align with new names
- fix autodoc format

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240408130927.78594-1-ast@fiberby.net/

Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen (4):
flow_offload: add control flag checking helpers
nfp: flower: fix check for unsupported control flags
net: prestera: flower: validate control flags
net: dsa: microchip: ksz9477: flower: validate control flags

drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477_tc_flower.c | 3 +
.../marvell/prestera/prestera_flower.c | 4 ++
.../ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c | 6 +-
include/net/flow_offload.h | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--
2.43.0


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:32    [W:0.038 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site