| 2f5e1565 | 17-Jan-2024 |
Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com> |
mlxsw: spectrum_acl_tcam: Fix stack corruption
[ Upstream commit 483ae90d8f976f8339cf81066312e1329f2d3706 ]
When tc filters are first added to a net device, the corresponding local
port gets bound
mlxsw: spectrum_acl_tcam: Fix stack corruption
[ Upstream commit 483ae90d8f976f8339cf81066312e1329f2d3706 ]
When tc filters are first added to a net device, the corresponding local
port gets bound to an ACL group in the device. The group contains a list
of ACLs. In turn, each ACL points to a different TCAM region where the
filters are stored. During forwarding, the ACLs are sequentially
evaluated until a match is found.
One reason to place filters in different regions is when they are added
with decreasing priorities and in an alternating order so that two
consecutive filters can never fit in the same region because of their
key usage.
In Spectrum-2 and newer ASICs the firmware started to report that the
maximum number of ACLs in a group is more than 16, but the layout of the
register that configures ACL groups (PAGT) was not updated to account
for that. It is therefore possible to hit stack corruption [1] in the
rare case where more than 16 ACLs in a group are required.
Fix by limiting the maximum ACL group size to the minimum between what
the firmware reports and the maximum ACLs that fit in the PAGT register.
Add a test case to make sure the machine does not crash when this
condition is hit.
[1]
Kernel panic - not syncing: stack-protector: Kernel stack is corrupted in: mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_group_update+0x116/0x120
[...]
dump_stack_lvl+0x36/0x50
panic+0x305/0x330
__stack_chk_fail+0x15/0x20
mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_group_update+0x116/0x120
mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_group_region_attach+0x69/0x110
mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_vchunk_get+0x492/0xa20
mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_ventry_add+0x25/0xe0
mlxsw_sp_acl_rule_add+0x47/0x240
mlxsw_sp_flower_replace+0x1a9/0x1d0
tc_setup_cb_add+0xdc/0x1c0
fl_hw_replace_filter+0x146/0x1f0
fl_change+0xc17/0x1360
tc_new_tfilter+0x472/0xb90
rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x313/0x3b0
netlink_rcv_skb+0x58/0x100
netlink_unicast+0x244/0x390
netlink_sendmsg+0x1e4/0x440
____sys_sendmsg+0x164/0x260
___sys_sendmsg+0x9a/0xe0
__sys_sendmsg+0x7a/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x40/0xe0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0x6b
Fixes: c3ab435466d5 ("mlxsw: spectrum: Extend to support Spectrum-2 ASIC")
Reported-by: Orel Hagag <orelh@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/2d91c89afba59c22587b444994ae419dbea8d876.1705502064.git.petrm@nvidia.com
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
show more ...
|
| ed62af45 | 16-Jun-2022 |
Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com> |
selftests: spectrum-2: tc_flower_scale: Dynamically set scale target
Instead of hard coding the scale target in the test, dynamically set it
based on the maximum number of flow counters and their cu
selftests: spectrum-2: tc_flower_scale: Dynamically set scale target
Instead of hard coding the scale target in the test, dynamically set it
based on the maximum number of flow counters and their current
occupancy.
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|
| be00853b | 16-Jun-2022 |
Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com> |
selftests: mlxsw: Add a RIF counter scale test
This tests creates as many RIFs as possible, ideally more than there can be
RIF counters (though that is currently only possible on Spectrum-1). It
the
selftests: mlxsw: Add a RIF counter scale test
This tests creates as many RIFs as possible, ideally more than there can be
RIF counters (though that is currently only possible on Spectrum-1). It
then tries to enable L3 HW stats on each of the RIFs. It also contains the
traffic test, which tries to run traffic through a log2 of those counters
and checks that the traffic is shown in the counter values.
Like with tc_flower traffic test, take a log2 subset of rules. The logic
behind picking log2 rules is that then every bit of the instantiated item's
number is exercised. This should catch issues whether they happen at the
high end, low end, or somewhere in between.
Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|
| 35d5829e | 16-Jun-2022 |
Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com> |
selftests: mlxsw: resource_scale: Pass target count to cleanup
The scale tests are verifying behavior of mlxsw when number of instances of
some resource reaches the ASIC capacity. The number of inst
selftests: mlxsw: resource_scale: Pass target count to cleanup
The scale tests are verifying behavior of mlxsw when number of instances of
some resource reaches the ASIC capacity. The number of instances is
referred to as "target" number.
No scale tests so far needed to know this target number to clean up. E.g.
the tc_flower simply removes the clsact qdisc that all the tested filters
are hooked onto, and that takes care of collecting all the filters.
However, for the RIF counter test, which is being added in a future patch,
VLAN netdevices are created. These are created as part of the test, but of
course the cleanup needs to undo them again. For that it needs to know how
many there were. To support this usage, pass the target number to the
cleanup callback.
Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|
| 8cad339d | 16-Jun-2022 |
Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com> |
selftests: mlxsw: resource_scale: Allow skipping a test
The scale tests are currently testing two things: that some number of
instances of a given resource can actually be created; and that when an
selftests: mlxsw: resource_scale: Allow skipping a test
The scale tests are currently testing two things: that some number of
instances of a given resource can actually be created; and that when an
attempt is made to create more than the supported amount, the failures are
noted and handled gracefully.
Sometimes the scale test depends on more than one resource. In particular,
a following patch will add a RIF counter scale test, which depends on the
number of RIF counters that can be bound, and also on the number of RIFs
that can be created.
When the test is limited by the auxiliary resource and not by the primary
one, there's no point trying to run the overflow test, because it would be
testing exhaustion of the wrong resource.
To support this use case, when the $test_get_target yields 0, skip the test
instead.
Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|
| 3128b9f5 | 16-Jun-2022 |
Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com> |
selftests: mlxsw: resource_scale: Introduce traffic tests
The scale tests are currently testing two things: that some number of
instances of a given resource can actually be created; and that when a
selftests: mlxsw: resource_scale: Introduce traffic tests
The scale tests are currently testing two things: that some number of
instances of a given resource can actually be created; and that when an
attempt is made to create more than the supported amount, the failures are
noted and handled gracefully.
However the ability to allocate the resource does not mean that the
resource actually works when passing traffic. For that, make it possible
for a given scale to also test traffic.
Traffic test is only run on the positive leg of the scale test (no point
trying to pass traffic when the expected outcome is that the resource will
not be allocated). Traffic tests are opt-in, if a given test does not
expose it, it is not run.
To this end, delay the test cleanup until after the traffic test is run.
Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Amit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|
| b22b0b0b | 18-Nov-2019 |
Danielle Ratson <danieller@mellanox.com> |
selftests: mlxsw: Check devlink device before running test
The scale test for Spectrum-2 should only be invoked for Spectrum-2.
Skip the test otherwise.
Signed-off-by: Danielle Ratson <danieller@me
selftests: mlxsw: Check devlink device before running test
The scale test for Spectrum-2 should only be invoked for Spectrum-2.
Skip the test otherwise.
Signed-off-by: Danielle Ratson <danieller@mellanox.com>
Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|