Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/mlx5: fix validation of VXLAN/VXLAN-GPE specs

[Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>]

Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Raslan Darawsheh
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2020 4:22 PM
> To: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
> <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/mlx5: fix validation of VXLAN/VXLAN-GPE
> specs
> 
> Trying to create zero spec for vni wasn't allowed, to
> avoid matching all packets from previous layer (udp).
> This behavior is incorrect, since VXLAN is being identified
> through the outer UDP destination port.
> 
> Currently, if the user didn't specify outer UDP destination
> port the PMD will automatically match only on  outer
> UDP port of 4798, and if the user want to match on some none
> standard port he need to specify it explicitly in the rule.
> 
> This removes the limitation of vni spec to be able to match any
> vni.
> 
> Fixes: 23c1d42c ("net/mlx5: split flow validation to dedicated function")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c | 31 -------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 31 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c
> index 41072da..2ef6558 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c
> @@ -1836,7 +1836,6 @@ mlx5_flow_validate_item_vxlan(const struct
> rte_flow_item *item,
>  		uint32_t vlan_id;
>  		uint8_t vni[4];
>  	} id = { .vlan_id = 0, };
> -	uint32_t vlan_id = 0;
> 
> 
>  	if (item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_TUNNEL)
> @@ -1863,23 +1862,8 @@ mlx5_flow_validate_item_vxlan(const struct
> rte_flow_item *item,
>  		return ret;
>  	if (spec) {
>  		memcpy(&id.vni[1], spec->vni, 3);
> -		vlan_id = id.vlan_id;
>  		memcpy(&id.vni[1], mask->vni, 3);
> -		vlan_id &= id.vlan_id;
>  	}
> -	/*
> -	 * Tunnel id 0 is equivalent as not adding a VXLAN layer, if
> -	 * only this layer is defined in the Verbs specification it is
> -	 * interpreted as wildcard and all packets will match this
> -	 * rule, if it follows a full stack layer (ex: eth / ipv4 /
> -	 * udp), all packets matching the layers before will also
> -	 * match this rule.  To avoid such situation, VNI 0 is
> -	 * currently refused.
> -	 */
> -	if (!vlan_id)
> -		return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> -					  RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> item,
> -					  "VXLAN vni cannot be 0");
>  	if (!(item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER))
>  		return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
>  					  RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> item,
> @@ -1918,7 +1902,6 @@ mlx5_flow_validate_item_vxlan_gpe(const struct
> rte_flow_item *item,
>  		uint32_t vlan_id;
>  		uint8_t vni[4];
>  	} id = { .vlan_id = 0, };
> -	uint32_t vlan_id = 0;
> 
>  	if (!priv->config.l3_vxlan_en)
>  		return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> @@ -1956,22 +1939,8 @@ mlx5_flow_validate_item_vxlan_gpe(const struct
> rte_flow_item *item,
>  						  "VxLAN-GPE protocol"
>  						  " not supported");
>  		memcpy(&id.vni[1], spec->vni, 3);
> -		vlan_id = id.vlan_id;
>  		memcpy(&id.vni[1], mask->vni, 3);
> -		vlan_id &= id.vlan_id;
>  	}
> -	/*
> -	 * Tunnel id 0 is equivalent as not adding a VXLAN layer, if only this
> -	 * layer is defined in the Verbs specification it is interpreted as
> -	 * wildcard and all packets will match this rule, if it follows a full
> -	 * stack layer (ex: eth / ipv4 / udp), all packets matching the layers
> -	 * before will also match this rule.  To avoid such situation, VNI 0
> -	 * is currently refused.
> -	 */
> -	if (!vlan_id)
> -		return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> -					  RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> item,
> -					  "VXLAN-GPE vni cannot be 0");
>  	if (!(item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER))
>  		return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
>  					  RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> item,
> --
> 2.7.4

Patch applied to next-net-mlx,

Kindest regards,
Raslan Darawsheh