| Message ID | 20231220075914.2426376-1-linma@zju.edu.cn (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v1] bridge: cfm: fix enum typo in br_cc_ccm_tx_parse | expand |
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 03:59:14PM +0800, Lin Ma wrote: > It appears that there is a typo in the code where the nlattr array is > being parsed with policy br_cfm_cc_ccm_tx_policy, but the instance is > being accessed via IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_RDI_INSTANCE, which is associated > with the policy br_cfm_cc_rdi_policy. > > Though it seems like a harmless typo since these two enum owns the exact > same value (1 here), it is quite misleading hence fix it by using the > correct enum IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_INSTANCE here. > > Fixes: 2be665c3940d ("bridge: cfm: Netlink SET configuration Interface.") > Signed-off-by: Lin Ma <linma@zju.edu.cn> Thanks Lin Ma, I agree with your analysis, that the problem was introduced in the cited commit, and that it is resolved by your patch. However, as there is no user-visible bug I don't believe this reaches the bar for a 'fix' for Networking code. Accordingly, I think that the Fixes tag should be dropped. And, instead cited commit can be mentioned using something like "This problem was introduced by commit ...". Also, as I don't think it is a fix I think it should be targeted at the net-next tree: Subject: [PATCH net-next vX] ... The above nits notwithstanding, Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> > --- > net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c > index 5c4c369f8536..2faab44652e7 100644 > --- a/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c > +++ b/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c > @@ -362,7 +362,7 @@ static int br_cc_ccm_tx_parse(struct net_bridge *br, struct nlattr *attr, > > memset(&tx_info, 0, sizeof(tx_info)); > > - instance = nla_get_u32(tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_RDI_INSTANCE]); > + instance = nla_get_u32(tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_INSTANCE]); > nla_memcpy(&tx_info.dmac.addr, > tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_DMAC], > sizeof(tx_info.dmac.addr)); > -- > 2.17.1 > >
Hello Simon, > > Thanks Lin Ma, > > I agree with your analysis, that the problem was introduced in the > cited commit, and that it is resolved by your patch. > Thanks for the encouragement. > However, as there is no user-visible bug I don't believe this reaches > the bar for a 'fix' for Networking code. Accordingly, I think that > the Fixes tag should be dropped. And, instead cited commit can be mentioned > using something like "This problem was introduced by commit ...". > > Also, as I don't think it is a fix I think it should be targeted at the > net-next tree: > > Subject: [PATCH net-next vX] ... > Copy that. Yeah, once the enum IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_RDI_INSTANCE and the IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_INSTANCE keeps the value 1, everything should work as usual. I will resend the patch as told. > The above nits notwithstanding, > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> > Regards Lin
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 12:29:16AM +0800, Lin Ma wrote: > Hello Simon, > > > > > Thanks Lin Ma, > > > > I agree with your analysis, that the problem was introduced in the > > cited commit, and that it is resolved by your patch. > > > > Thanks for the encouragement. > > > However, as there is no user-visible bug I don't believe this reaches > > the bar for a 'fix' for Networking code. Accordingly, I think that > > the Fixes tag should be dropped. And, instead cited commit can be mentioned > > using something like "This problem was introduced by commit ...". > > > > Also, as I don't think it is a fix I think it should be targeted at the > > net-next tree: > > > > Subject: [PATCH net-next vX] ... > > > > Copy that. Yeah, once the enum IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_RDI_INSTANCE and the > IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_INSTANCE keeps the value 1, everything should work > as usual. I will resend the patch as told. Thanks, much appreciated. v2 looks good to me. > > > The above nits notwithstanding, > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> > > > > Regards > Lin
diff --git a/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c index 5c4c369f8536..2faab44652e7 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c @@ -362,7 +362,7 @@ static int br_cc_ccm_tx_parse(struct net_bridge *br, struct nlattr *attr, memset(&tx_info, 0, sizeof(tx_info)); - instance = nla_get_u32(tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_RDI_INSTANCE]); + instance = nla_get_u32(tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_INSTANCE]); nla_memcpy(&tx_info.dmac.addr, tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_DMAC], sizeof(tx_info.dmac.addr));
It appears that there is a typo in the code where the nlattr array is being parsed with policy br_cfm_cc_ccm_tx_policy, but the instance is being accessed via IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_RDI_INSTANCE, which is associated with the policy br_cfm_cc_rdi_policy. Though it seems like a harmless typo since these two enum owns the exact same value (1 here), it is quite misleading hence fix it by using the correct enum IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_CC_CCM_TX_INSTANCE here. Fixes: 2be665c3940d ("bridge: cfm: Netlink SET configuration Interface.") Signed-off-by: Lin Ma <linma@zju.edu.cn> --- net/bridge/br_cfm_netlink.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)