Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] net: microchip: sparx5: add support for apptrust

From: <Daniel.Machon@microchip.com>
To: <petrm@nvidia.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
	<maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>, <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	<edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>, <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	<Lars.Povlsen@microchip.com>, <Steen.Hegelund@microchip.com>,
	<UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>, <joe@perches.com>,
	<linux@armlinux.org.uk>, <Horatiu.Vultur@microchip.com>,
	<Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>, <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] net: microchip: sparx5: add support for apptrust
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 06:52:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YzqJEESxhwkcayjs@DEN-LT-70577> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zgegu9kq.fsf@nvidia.com>

> > Make use of set/getapptrust() to implement per-selector trust and trust
> > order.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com>
> > ---
> >  .../ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_dcb.c    | 116 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  .../ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_main.h   |   3 +
> >  .../ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_port.c   |   4 +-
> >  .../ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_port.h   |   2 +
> >  .../ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_qos.c    |   4 +
> >  5 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_dcb.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_dcb.c
> > index db17c124dac8..10aeb422b1ae 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_dcb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_dcb.c
> > @@ -8,6 +8,22 @@
> >
> >  #include "sparx5_port.h"
> >
> > +static const struct sparx5_dcb_apptrust {
> > +     u8 selectors[256];
> > +     int nselectors;
> > +     char *names;
> 
> I think this should be just "name".

I dont think so. This is a str representation of all the selector values.
"names" makes more sense to me.

> 
> > +} *apptrust[SPX5_PORTS];
> > +
> > +/* Sparx5 supported apptrust configurations */
> > +static const struct sparx5_dcb_apptrust apptrust_conf[4] = {
> > +     /* Empty *must* be first */
> > +     { { 0                         }, 0, "empty"    },
> > +     { { IEEE_8021QAZ_APP_SEL_DSCP }, 1, "dscp"     },
> > +     { { DCB_APP_SEL_PCP           }, 1, "pcp"      },
> > +     { { IEEE_8021QAZ_APP_SEL_DSCP,
> > +         DCB_APP_SEL_PCP           }, 2, "dscp pcp" },
> > +};
> > +
> >  /* Validate app entry.
> >   *
> >   * Check for valid selectors and valid protocol and priority ranges.
> > @@ -37,12 +53,59 @@ static int sparx5_dcb_app_validate(struct net_device *dev,
> >       return err;
> >  }
> >
> > +/* Validate apptrust configuration.
> > + *
> > + * Return index of supported apptrust configuration if valid, otherwise return
> > + * error.
> > + */
> > +static int sparx5_dcb_apptrust_validate(struct net_device *dev, u8 *selectors,
> > +                                     int nselectors, int *err)
> > +{
> > +     bool match;
> > +     int i, ii;
> > +
> > +     for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(apptrust_conf); i++) {
> 
> I would do this here:
> 
>     if (apptrust_conf[i].nselectors != nselectors) continue;
> 
> to avoid having to think about the semantics of comparing to all those
> zeroes in apptrust_conf.selectors array.

Yes, that would be good.

> 
> > +             match = true;
> > +             for (ii = 0; ii < nselectors; ii++) {
> > +                     if (apptrust_conf[i].selectors[ii] !=
> > +                         *(selectors + ii)) {
> > +                             match = false;
> > +                             break;
> > +                     }
> > +             }
> > +             if (match)
> > +                     break;
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     /* Requested trust configuration is not supported */
> > +     if (!match) {
> > +             netdev_err(dev, "Valid apptrust configurations are:\n");
> > +             for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(apptrust_conf); i++)
> > +                     pr_info("order: %s\n", apptrust_conf[i].names);
> > +             *err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     return i;
> > +}
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel