Duplicated tag index in pattern template will most likely cause
matching failures such as "template tag index is 0 data mask 0xff /
tag index is 0 data mask 0xffff / end"

If the upper layer application needs to match the same tag twice
with different masks, it should be consolidated into one rte_item
with the desired mask.

"template tag index is 0 data mask 0xff / tag index is 0 data mask
0xff00 / end" should be present as "template tag index is 0 data mask
0xffff / end"

Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Rongwei Liu <rongw...@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_hw.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_hw.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_hw.c
index 7e0ee8d883..78011584eb 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_hw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_hw.c
@@ -4831,8 +4831,9 @@ flow_hw_pattern_validate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
                         struct rte_flow_error *error)
 {
        struct mlx5_priv *priv = dev->data->dev_private;
-       int i;
+       int i, tag_idx;
        bool items_end = false;
+       uint32_t tag_bitmap = 0;
 
        if (!attr->ingress && !attr->egress && !attr->transfer)
                return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL, 
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR, NULL,
@@ -4874,16 +4875,26 @@ flow_hw_pattern_validate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
                switch (type) {
                case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_TAG:
                {
-                       int reg;
                        const struct rte_flow_item_tag *tag =
                                (const struct rte_flow_item_tag *)items[i].spec;
 
-                       reg = flow_hw_get_reg_id(RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_TAG, 
tag->index);
-                       if (reg == REG_NON)
+                       if (tag == NULL)
+                               return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
+                                                         
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
+                                                         NULL,
+                                                         "Tag spec is NULL");
+                       tag_idx = flow_hw_get_reg_id(RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_TAG, 
tag->index);
+                       if (tag_idx == REG_NON)
                                return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
                                                          
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
                                                          NULL,
                                                          "Unsupported tag 
index");
+                       if (tag_bitmap & (1 << tag_idx))
+                               return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
+                                                         
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
+                                                         NULL,
+                                                         "Duplicated tag 
index");
+                       tag_bitmap |= 1 << tag_idx;
                        break;
                }
                case MLX5_RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_TAG:
@@ -4897,6 +4908,12 @@ flow_hw_pattern_validate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
                                                          
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
                                                          NULL,
                                                          "Unsupported internal 
tag index");
+                       if (tag_bitmap & (1 << tag->index))
+                               return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
+                                                         
RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
+                                                         NULL,
+                                                         "Duplicated tag 
index");
+                       tag_bitmap |= 1 << tag->index;
                        break;
                }
                case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_REPRESENTED_PORT:
-- 
2.27.0

Reply via email to