From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8DA4A0527
for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:43:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7696A1C;
Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:43:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com (mail-wm1-f44.google.com
[209.85.128.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 929B369C8
for <stable@dpdk.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:43:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id h2so470281wmm.0
for <stable@dpdk.org>; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 10:43:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=WDu9Mz3Ja+HfCScezbPc6P5z6KKrulsHDPTYZVW/+dw=;
b=kH8xDYpNhjiWCuXSsdQOim/xchRiLdq1sIxlMkAveSAbKsKZgWWMI30WcE1uTlNao3
gZ1J0mabjtHSb3v9Z1HMea8bpn2FmYke8itMyB+AQuZfPa1AiVa0+xLzX4fLfRdolhJ2
jc5Wpc5AJAR/wDj/EWuNFRuTgkDa/OOQ/s/D0hZciiHXykPUt9CBsX4+5F2tdc2hGdcq
Ar7HbN6NEaxaDw+6vao3oRXpLvcFrvSft1L+HrSEQsWTK3JI4d7qBSa39/fGog53Wz51
pN7yE3p50VaZttTmXncc12pK9X9Q7UBLOhBKCMZtpiIvbNauWkYmIJyI60fcvpMh5stW
++rg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=WDu9Mz3Ja+HfCScezbPc6P5z6KKrulsHDPTYZVW/+dw=;
b=LCSd37RvjyPJYm7Yqvzep30EmsVfEeZO0DFGOeRvXOXMFdeu8RaqwqJhjFGWFHps2v
hT1tz3PhezLai06TmFhaN5nSAMEKkhpvrXrrjCIiLVLY4p5wNpkpPEigVMV7IhglWCBD
JLrQ0rOB4ap7jVy+XpanqfiFBh+vs2olhq5CBE1R2MRoeJdu/2ITB528QqE45X5yUXum
4p38yR8lRZ86qQdjVqrKI32wmZP39dyvS6WqbFuWoJ2cG7895mldnoXq5FUuNp76ZBvB
1xau9dyhzBsU/us8FfbFBLl7rvH954mC3AYBI0yB0XwEHFbdlQ66aC57A5/t4NFI+okm
zagQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5317LNrRmcXHnSW7ADudFPwoRvPKX8eOxabEhRQOGLK9uOxKvkAk
ACsKIPmwC3Pu/LrSud6bFan434hQvAJURskE
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxdT1srvSce7X+2zBENF/CiGDu2MyprFGgjnn/2qrteULwuoEF5Vr3HYHiaY//iuhqVbrwCTA==
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1d51:: with SMTP id d78mr574133wmd.60.1604947387368;
Mon, 09 Nov 2020 10:43:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([88.98.246.218])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u81sm344296wmb.27.2020.11.09.10.43.06
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Mon, 09 Nov 2020 10:43:06 -0800 (PST)
From: luca.boccassi@gmail.com
To: Padraig Connolly <padraig.j.connolly@intel.com>
Cc: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>,
dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 18:40:21 +0000
Message-Id: <20201109184111.3463090-33-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.27.0
In-Reply-To: <20201109184111.3463090-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
References: <20201028104606.3504127-207-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
<20201109184111.3463090-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: [dpdk-stable] patch 'net/i40e: fix QinQ flow pattern to allow non
full mask' has been queued to stable release 19.11.6
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "stable" <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Hi,
FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 19.11.6
Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet.
It will be pushed if I get no objections before 11/11/20. So please
shout if anyone has objections.
Also note that after the patch there's a diff of the upstream commit vs the
patch applied to the branch. This will indicate if there was any rebasing
needed to apply to the stable branch. If there were code changes for rebasing
(ie: not only metadata diffs), please double check that the rebase was
correctly done.
Queued patches are on a temporary branch at:
https://github.com/bluca/dpdk-stable
This queued commit can be viewed at:
https://github.com/bluca/dpdk-stable/commit/6955f4bf01ca00b656ee38260abe5e9978ed4605
Thanks.
Luca Boccassi
---
>From 6955f4bf01ca00b656ee38260abe5e9978ed4605 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Padraig Connolly <padraig.j.connolly@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 10:28:58 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] net/i40e: fix QinQ flow pattern to allow non full mask
[ upstream commit ff0df4e134cc6efe75e1ed103b2c7b316b8269e2 ]
Issue reported by customer that only full mask was allowed on inner and
outer VLAN tag, thus not allowing mask to set VLAN ID filter only.
Removed check that enforces inner vlan and outer vlan equal
I40E_TCI_MASK (full mask 0xffff).
Fixes: d37705068ee8 ("net/i40e: parse QinQ pattern")
Signed-off-by: Padraig Connolly <padraig.j.connolly@intel.com>
Acked-by: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
---
drivers/net/i40e/i40e_flow.c | 11 +++--------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_flow.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_flow.c
index 11e0e24782..7fe22e3007 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_flow.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_flow.c
@@ -4178,14 +4178,9 @@ i40e_flow_parse_qinq_pattern(__rte_unused struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
}
/* Get filter specification */
- if ((o_vlan_mask != NULL) && (o_vlan_mask->tci ==
- rte_cpu_to_be_16(I40E_TCI_MASK)) &&
- (i_vlan_mask != NULL) &&
- (i_vlan_mask->tci == rte_cpu_to_be_16(I40E_TCI_MASK))) {
- filter->outer_vlan = rte_be_to_cpu_16(o_vlan_spec->tci)
- & I40E_TCI_MASK;
- filter->inner_vlan = rte_be_to_cpu_16(i_vlan_spec->tci)
- & I40E_TCI_MASK;
+ if (o_vlan_mask != NULL && i_vlan_mask != NULL) {
+ filter->outer_vlan = rte_be_to_cpu_16(o_vlan_spec->tci);
+ filter->inner_vlan = rte_be_to_cpu_16(i_vlan_spec->tci);
} else {
rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
--
2.27.0
---
Diff of the applied patch vs upstream commit (please double-check if non-empty:
---
--- - 2020-11-09 18:40:12.546816862 +0000
+++ 0033-net-i40e-fix-QinQ-flow-pattern-to-allow-non-full-mas.patch 2020-11-09 18:40:11.155311656 +0000
@@ -1 +1 @@
-From ff0df4e134cc6efe75e1ed103b2c7b316b8269e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From 6955f4bf01ca00b656ee38260abe5e9978ed4605 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
@@ -5,0 +6,2 @@
+[ upstream commit ff0df4e134cc6efe75e1ed103b2c7b316b8269e2 ]
+
@@ -12 +13,0 @@
-Cc: stable@dpdk.org
@@ -21 +22 @@
-index adc5da1c53..8e7a9989b3 100644
+index 11e0e24782..7fe22e3007 100644
@@ -24 +25 @@
-@@ -4649,14 +4649,9 @@ i40e_flow_parse_qinq_pattern(__rte_unused struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
+@@ -4178,14 +4178,9 @@ i40e_flow_parse_qinq_pattern(__rte_unused struct rte_eth_dev *dev,