similar to: [Bridge] [PATCH net-next] netlink: provide an ability to set default extack message

In netdev common pattern, extack pointer is forwarded to the drivers to be filled with error message. However, the caller can easily overwrite the filled message. Instead of adding multiple "if (!extack->_msg)" checks before any NL_SET_ERR_MSG() call, which appears after call to the driver, let's add new macro to common code. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y9Irgrgf3uxOjwUm at

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 09:15:03PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro at nvidia.com> > > In netdev common pattern, xxtack pointer is forwarded to the drivers ~~~~~~ extack > to be filled with error message. However, the caller can easily > overwrite the filled message. > > Instead of

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:32:13AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 09:15:03PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro at nvidia.com> > > > > In netdev common pattern, xxtack pointer is forwarded to the drivers > ~~~~~~ > extack > > > to be filled with

On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 00:32:13 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 09:15:03PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro at nvidia.com> > > > > In netdev common pattern, xxtack pointer is forwarded to the drivers > ~~~~~~ > extack > > > to be filled with error

Hello, On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 18:51 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > In netdev common pattern, extack pointer is forwarded to the drivers > to be filled with error message. However, the caller can easily > overwrite the filled message. > > Instead of adding multiple "if (!extack->_msg)" checks before any > NL_SET_ERR_MSG() call, which appears after call to the

On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 07:26:13 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > That'd be my preference too, FWIW. It's only the offload cases which > > need this sort of fallback. > > Of course not, almost any error unwind path which sets extack will need it. I guess we can come up with scenarios where the new behavior would be useful. But the fact is - your patch changes 4 places...

Adjust drivers that support the 'FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_META' key to reject filters that try to match on the newly added layer 2 miss option. Add an extack message to clearly communicate the failure reason to user space. Example: # tc filter add dev swp1 egress pref 1 proto all flower skip_sw l2_miss true action drop Error: mlxsw_spectrum: Can't match on "l2_miss". We have

On 12/07/2023 17:48, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 04:54:15PM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: >> When we create an L2 loop on a bridge in netns, we will see packets storm >> even if STP is enabled. >> >> # unshare -n >> # ip link add br0 type bridge >> # ip link add veth0 type veth peer name veth1 >> # ip link set veth0 master

When we create an L2 loop on a bridge in netns, we will see packets storm even if STP is enabled. # unshare -n # ip link add br0 type bridge # ip link add veth0 type veth peer name veth1 # ip link set veth0 master br0 up # ip link set veth1 master br0 up # ip link set br0 type bridge stp_state 1 # ip link set br0 up # sleep 30 # ip -s link show br0 2: br0:

In below example, before the fix, mtu attribute is supported by the parent mgmtdev, but the error message showing "All provided are not supported" is just misleading. $ vdpa mgmtdev show vdpasim_net: supported_classes net max_supported_vqs 3 dev_features MTU MAC CTRL_VQ CTRL_MAC_ADDR ANY_LAYOUT VERSION_1 ACCESS_PLATFORM $ vdpa dev add mgmtdev vdpasim_net name vdpasim0 mtu 5000

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 08:44:01PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Current XDP implementation want guest offloads feature to be disabled s/want/wants/ > on qemu cli. on the device. > This is inconvenient and means guest can't benefit from > offloads if XDP is not used. This patch tries to address this > limitation by disable disabling > the offloads on demand through control

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 08:44:01PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Current XDP implementation want guest offloads feature to be disabled s/want/wants/ > on qemu cli. on the device. > This is inconvenient and means guest can't benefit from > offloads if XDP is not used. This patch tries to address this > limitation by disable disabling > the offloads on demand through control

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:54:55PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/10/24 ??6:42, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > ? And we should try to avoid > > > putting ctrl vq and Rx/Tx vqs in the same DMA space to prevent > > > guests having the chance to bypass the host (e.g. QEMU) to > > > setup the backend accelerator

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:54:55PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/10/24 ??6:42, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > ? And we should try to avoid > > > putting ctrl vq and Rx/Tx vqs in the same DMA space to prevent > > > guests having the chance to bypass the host (e.g. QEMU) to > > > setup the backend accelerator

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 04:54:49PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Current XDP implementation wants guest offloads feature to be disabled > on device. This is inconvenient and means guest can't benefit from > offloads if XDP is not used. This patch tries to address this > limitation by disabling the offloads on demand through control guest > offloads. Guest offloads will be disabled

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 04:54:49PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Current XDP implementation wants guest offloads feature to be disabled > on device. This is inconvenient and means guest can't benefit from > offloads if XDP is not used. This patch tries to address this > limitation by disabling the offloads on demand through control guest > offloads. Guest offloads will be disabled

We don't support partial csumed packet since its metadata will be lost or incorrect during XDP processing. So fail the XDP set if guest_csum feature is negotiated. Fixes: f600b6905015 ("virtio_net: Add XDP support") Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer at redhat.com> Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer at redhat.com> Cc: Pavel Popa <pashinho1990 at gmail.com>

On 12/07/2023 02:54, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > When we create an L2 loop on a bridge in netns, we will see packets storm > even if STP is enabled. > > # unshare -n > # ip link add br0 type bridge > # ip link add veth0 type veth peer name veth1 > # ip link set veth0 master br0 up > # ip link set veth1 master br0 up > # ip link set br0 type bridge stp_state 1

(CC'ing bridge maintainers.) Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu at amazon.com> writes: > From: Harry Coin <hcoin at quietfountain.com> > Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 16:40:03 -0500 >> On 7/11/23 15:44, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> >>>>>> The current llc_rcv.c around line 166 in net/llc/llc_input.c has >> >>>>>> >>

On 2019/10/28 ??9:58, Tiwei Bie wrote: > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 08:16:26AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:54:55PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>> On 2019/10/24 ??6:42, Jason Wang wrote: >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>> >>>>> ? And we should try to avoid >>>>> putting ctrl vq and Rx/Tx vqs in the