From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF6D7A09EA for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:59:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7454C99E; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:59:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2F8C96E; Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:59:03 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: fSoy5ScK/AxUcJDrNA4W9puz6o0Fzd1X4MSdX8x1Y06iPYUp2+AJOL3uTtIPTsF3yJmq0xkTcw eW5FIWrZLigw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9829"; a="173319315" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,405,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="173319315" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Dec 2020 05:59:02 -0800 IronPort-SDR: vO4vF7Qh1pH1r0m/fG7TDlkfxjQc9ctz4CGQcKWwt+8862uO0Y4eduvQgV6UfXpRKvS+Bgxgcx XAcT/BOjW3Gg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,405,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="318291993" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.215.89]) ([10.213.215.89]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Dec 2020 05:59:00 -0800 To: Ivan Malov , dev@dpdk.org Cc: stable@dpdk.org, Andrew Rybchenko , Andy Moreton References: <20201201073010.10166-1-ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:58:57 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201201073010.10166-1-ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] common/sfc_efx/base: support alternative MAE match fields X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" On 12/1/2020 7:30 AM, Ivan Malov wrote: > If MAE slice is configured without conntrack support, outer > rules must match on IP SRC/DST. This isn't reported clearly > by the FW because IPv4 and IPv6 have separate SRC/DST pairs. > The FW reports status ALWAYS for all these four fields, and > having an all-zeros mask for either field prevents the spec > from being certified by the existing spec validation method. > > Extend the spec validation to take the "alternative" fields > into account so that legitimate specs don't get turned down. > > Fixes: ed15d7f8e064 ("common/sfc_efx/base: validate and compare outer match specs") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov > Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko > Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton Applied to dpdk-next-net/main, thanks.