[dpdk-stable] patch 'acl: forbid rule with priority zero' has been queued to stable release 18.08.1

[Kevin Traynor]

Hi,

FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 18.08.1

Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet.
It will be pushed if I get no objections before 11/23/18. So please
shout if anyone has objections.

Also note that after the patch there's a diff of the upstream commit vs the patch applied
to the branch. If the code is different (ie: not only metadata diffs), due for example to
a change in context or macro names, please double check it.

Thanks.

Kevin Traynor

---
>From 092b3294a61c625de69ecfad3e2e938111bfdd97 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:47:06 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] acl: forbid rule with priority zero

[ upstream commit 53945477981cf75cf8d66e67a098b486e37df167 ]

If user specifies priority=0 for some of ACL rules
that can cause rte_acl_classify to return wrong results.
The reason is that priority zero is used internally for no-match nodes.
See more details at: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79.
The simplest way to overcome the issue is just not allow zero
to be a valid priority for the rule.

Fixes: dc276b5780c2 ("acl: new library")

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
---
 lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.h |  2 +-
 test/test/test_acl.h     | 18 ++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.h b/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.h
index 34c3b9c6a..aa22e70c6 100644
--- a/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.h
+++ b/lib/librte_acl/rte_acl.h
@@ -89,5 +89,5 @@ enum {
 	RTE_ACL_MAX_INDEX = RTE_LEN2MASK(RTE_ACL_TYPE_SHIFT, uint32_t),
 	RTE_ACL_MAX_PRIORITY = RTE_ACL_MAX_INDEX,
-	RTE_ACL_MIN_PRIORITY = 0,
+	RTE_ACL_MIN_PRIORITY = 1,
 };
 
diff --git a/test/test/test_acl.h b/test/test/test_acl.h
index c4811c8f5..bbb0447a8 100644
--- a/test/test/test_acl.h
+++ b/test/test/test_acl.h
@@ -81,10 +81,12 @@ struct rte_acl_ipv4vlan_rule invalid_layout_rules[] = {
 		/* test src and dst address */
 		{
-				.data = {.userdata = 1, .category_mask = 1},
+				.data = {.userdata = 1, .category_mask = 1,
+					.priority = 1},
 				.src_addr = IPv4(10,0,0,0),
 				.src_mask_len = 24,
 		},
 		{
-				.data = {.userdata = 2, .category_mask = 1},
+				.data = {.userdata = 2, .category_mask = 1,
+					.priority = 1},
 				.dst_addr = IPv4(10,0,0,0),
 				.dst_mask_len = 24,
@@ -92,10 +94,12 @@ struct rte_acl_ipv4vlan_rule invalid_layout_rules[] = {
 		/* test src and dst ports */
 		{
-				.data = {.userdata = 3, .category_mask = 1},
+				.data = {.userdata = 3, .category_mask = 1,
+					.priority = 1},
 				.dst_port_low = 100,
 				.dst_port_high = 100,
 		},
 		{
-				.data = {.userdata = 4, .category_mask = 1},
+				.data = {.userdata = 4, .category_mask = 1,
+					.priority = 1},
 				.src_port_low = 100,
 				.src_port_high = 100,
@@ -103,10 +107,12 @@ struct rte_acl_ipv4vlan_rule invalid_layout_rules[] = {
 		/* test proto */
 		{
-				.data = {.userdata = 5, .category_mask = 1},
+				.data = {.userdata = 5, .category_mask = 1,
+					.priority = 1},
 				.proto = 0xf,
 				.proto_mask = 0xf
 		},
 		{
-				.data = {.userdata = 6, .category_mask = 1},
+				.data = {.userdata = 6, .category_mask = 1,
+					.priority = 1},
 				.dst_port_low = 0xf,
 				.dst_port_high = 0xf,
-- 
2.19.0

---
  Diff of the applied patch vs upstream commit (please double-check if non-empty:
---
--- -	2018-11-20 17:53:07.618425495 +0000
+++ 0006-acl-forbid-rule-with-priority-zero.patch	2018-11-20 17:53:07.000000000 +0000
@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
-From 53945477981cf75cf8d66e67a098b486e37df167 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From 092b3294a61c625de69ecfad3e2e938111bfdd97 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
 From: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
 Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:47:06 +0100
 Subject: [PATCH] acl: forbid rule with priority zero
 
+[ upstream commit 53945477981cf75cf8d66e67a098b486e37df167 ]
+
 If user specifies priority=0 for some of ACL rules
 that can cause rte_acl_classify to return wrong results.
 The reason is that priority zero is used internally for no-match nodes.
@@ -11,7 +13,6 @@
 to be a valid priority for the rule.
 
 Fixes: dc276b5780c2 ("acl: new library")
-Cc: stable at dpdk.org
 
 Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
 ---