From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31052A0A03 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 02:37:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E7F2140D8F; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 02:37:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223D5140D60; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 02:37:12 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: cPo5bB4zYqAg0WOnsJBudGISt1sg1HtElCa9WkNckFhK3HxGFjDC7voQ/CEms04E+lS8YVPzyK Hnw+JqFCb5Ew== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9868"; a="197566446" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,357,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="197566446" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jan 2021 17:37:11 -0800 IronPort-SDR: n6Bk2zShUbygm94mVPRWvemS+2W3KFR9zHzqr9nlS9BU0Z99k7X/2Ff8MAOwMQvZClKnAGfEVc vo9nG3TZAg/Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,357,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="383742148" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.222.154]) ([10.213.222.154]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jan 2021 17:37:10 -0800 To: Ivan Malov , dev@dpdk.org Cc: stable@dpdk.org, Andrew Rybchenko , Andy Moreton References: <20210117222112.26305-1-ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <4079e230-bad2-b14f-72b2-f9ee7fb1faed@intel.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 01:37:06 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210117222112.26305-1-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] [PATCH] common/sfc_efx/base: apply mask to value on match field set X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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 1/17/2021 10:21 PM, Ivan Malov wrote: > An application may submit all-zeros masks for a given field > to be used in two given specifications and, in the meantime, > use different unmasked values. Later on, when compared, the > two specifications will prove unequal, and, if the rules in > question are outer, the client driver will have to allocate > a separate rule for the second specification. Provided that > all other match criteria are the same, the HW will deem the > two outer rules being duplicates, which is in fact the case. > > Apply masks to values in efx_mae_match_spec_field_set() API > to fix the issue and avoid duplicate outer rule allocations. > > Fixes: 370ed675a952 ("common/sfc_efx/base: support setting PPORT in match spec") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Reported-by: Andrew Rybchenko > Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov > Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko > Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton Applied to dpdk-next-net/main, thanks.