Messages in this thread | | | From | Petr Machata <> | Subject | Re: [net-next v3 1/6] net: dcb: add new pcp selector to app object | Date | Wed, 26 Oct 2022 12:11:08 +0200 |
| |
Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com> writes:
> Add new PCP selector for the 8021Qaz APP managed object. > > As the PCP selector is not part of the 8021Qaz standard, a new non-std > extension attribute DCB_ATTR_DCB_APP has been introduced. Also two > helper functions to translate between selector and app attribute type > has been added. The new selector has been given a value of 255, to > minimize the risk of future overlap of std- and non-std attributes. > > The new DCB_ATTR_DCB_APP is sent alongside the ieee std attribute in the > app table. This means that the dcb_app struct can now both contain std- > and non-std app attributes. Currently there is no overlap between the > selector values of the two attributes. > > The purpose of adding the PCP selector, is to be able to offload > PCP-based queue classification to the 8021Q Priority Code Point table, > see 6.9.3 of IEEE Std 802.1Q-2018. > > PCP and DEI is encoded in the protocol field as 8*dei+pcp, so that a > mapping of PCP 2 and DEI 1 to priority 3 is encoded as {255, 10, 3}. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com>
> static struct sk_buff *dcbnl_newmsg(int type, u8 cmd, u32 port, u32 seq, > u32 flags, struct nlmsghdr **nlhp) > { > @@ -1116,8 +1143,9 @@ static int dcbnl_ieee_fill(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *netdev) > spin_lock_bh(&dcb_lock); > list_for_each_entry(itr, &dcb_app_list, list) { > if (itr->ifindex == netdev->ifindex) { > - err = nla_put(skb, DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP, sizeof(itr->app), > - &itr->app); > + enum ieee_attrs_app type = > + dcbnl_app_attr_type_get(itr->app.selector); > + err = nla_put(skb, type, sizeof(itr->app), &itr->app); > if (err) { > spin_unlock_bh(&dcb_lock); > return -EMSGSIZE; > @@ -1495,7 +1523,7 @@ static int dcbnl_ieee_set(struct net_device *netdev, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, > nla_for_each_nested(attr, ieee[DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP_TABLE], rem) { > struct dcb_app *app_data; > > - if (nla_type(attr) != DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP) > + if (!dcbnl_app_attr_type_validate(nla_type(attr))) > continue; > > if (nla_len(attr) < sizeof(struct dcb_app)) { > @@ -1556,7 +1584,7 @@ static int dcbnl_ieee_del(struct net_device *netdev, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, > nla_for_each_nested(attr, ieee[DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP_TABLE], rem) { > struct dcb_app *app_data; > > - if (nla_type(attr) != DCB_ATTR_IEEE_APP) > + if (!dcbnl_app_attr_type_validate(nla_type(attr))) > continue; > app_data = nla_data(attr); > if (ops->ieee_delapp)
I'm missing a validation that DCB_APP_SEL_PCP is always sent in DCB_ATTR_DCB_APP encapsulation. Wouldn't the current code permit sending it in the IEEE encap? This should be forbidden.
And vice versa: I'm not sure we want to permit sending the standard attributes in the DCB encap.
| |