From: Andre Guedes <andre.gue...@intel.com>
If we try to overwrite an existing rule with the same filter but
different action, we get EEXIST error as shown below.
$ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst <MACADDR> action 1 loc 10
$ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst <MACADDR> action 2 loc 10
rmgr: Cannot insert RX class rule: File exists
The second command is expected to overwrite the previous rule in location
10 and succeed.
This patch fixes igc_ethtool_check_nfc_rule() so it also checks the
rules location. In case they match, the rule under evaluation should not
be considered invalid.
Signed-off-by: Andre Guedes <andre.gue...@intel.com>
Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.br...@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirs...@intel.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c
index 43dff09a8f86..d14c46dce053 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c
@@ -1225,8 +1225,8 @@ static void igc_ethtool_init_nfc_rule(struct igc_nfc_rule
*rule,
* Rules with both destination and source MAC addresses are considered invalid
* since the driver doesn't support them.
*
- * Also, if there is already another rule with the same filter, @rule is
- * considered invalid.
+ * Also, if there is already another rule with the same filter in a different
+ * location, @rule is considered invalid.
*
* Context: Expects adapter->nfc_rule_lock to be held by caller.
*
@@ -1252,7 +1252,8 @@ static int igc_ethtool_check_nfc_rule(struct igc_adapter
*adapter,
list_for_each_entry(tmp, &adapter->nfc_rule_list, list) {
if (!memcmp(&rule->filter, &tmp->filter,
- sizeof(rule->filter))) {
+ sizeof(rule->filter)) &&
+ tmp->location != rule->location) {
netdev_dbg(dev, "Rule already exists\n");
return -EEXIST;
}
--
2.26.2
