From: Suman Ghosh Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 16:56:24 +0000 (+0530) Subject: octeontx2-pf: Fix ntuple rule creation to direct packet to VF with higher Rx queue... X-Git-Tag: v6.1.68~370 X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=76b088b639584bbee084ac12240791d0355b0688;p=platform%2Fkernel%2Flinux-starfive.git octeontx2-pf: Fix ntuple rule creation to direct packet to VF with higher Rx queue than its PF [ Upstream commit 4aa1d8f89b10cdc25a231dabf808d8935e0b137a ] It is possible to add a ntuple rule which would like to direct packet to a VF whose number of queues are greater/less than its PF's queue numbers. For example a PF can have 2 Rx queues but a VF created on that PF can have 8 Rx queues. As of today, ntuple rule will reject rule because it is checking the requested queue number against PF's number of Rx queues. As a part of this fix if the action of a ntuple rule is to move a packet to a VF's queue then the check is removed. Also, a debug information is printed to aware user that it is user's responsibility to cross check if the requested queue number on that VF is a valid one. Fixes: f0a1913f8a6f ("octeontx2-pf: Add support for ethtool ntuple filters") Signed-off-by: Suman Ghosh Reviewed-by: Wojciech Drewek Reviewed-by: Simon Horman Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121165624.3664182-1-sumang@marvell.com Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c index 934c199..5c4a4d35 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c @@ -1069,6 +1069,7 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct ethtool_rxnfc *nfc) struct ethhdr *eth_hdr; bool new = false; int err = 0; + u64 vf_num; u32 ring; if (!flow_cfg->max_flows) { @@ -1081,7 +1082,21 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct ethtool_rxnfc *nfc) if (!(pfvf->flags & OTX2_FLAG_NTUPLE_SUPPORT)) return -ENOMEM; - if (ring >= pfvf->hw.rx_queues && fsp->ring_cookie != RX_CLS_FLOW_DISC) + /* Number of queues on a VF can be greater or less than + * the PF's queue. Hence no need to check for the + * queue count. Hence no need to check queue count if PF + * is installing for its VF. Below is the expected vf_num value + * based on the ethtool commands. + * + * e.g. + * 1. ethtool -U ... action -1 ==> vf_num:255 + * 2. ethtool -U ... action ==> vf_num:0 + * 3. ethtool -U ... vf queue ==> + * vf_num:vf_idx+1 + */ + vf_num = ethtool_get_flow_spec_ring_vf(fsp->ring_cookie); + if (!is_otx2_vf(pfvf->pcifunc) && !vf_num && + ring >= pfvf->hw.rx_queues && fsp->ring_cookie != RX_CLS_FLOW_DISC) return -EINVAL; if (fsp->location >= otx2_get_maxflows(flow_cfg)) @@ -1163,6 +1178,9 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct ethtool_rxnfc *nfc) flow_cfg->nr_flows++; } + if (flow->is_vf) + netdev_info(pfvf->netdev, + "Make sure that VF's queue number is within its queue limit\n"); return 0; }