[Intel-wired-lan] [next PATCH S90 5/8] i40e: Fix multiple issues with UDP tunnel offload filter configuration

[Bowers, AndrewX]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces at osuosl.org] On
> Behalf Of Alice Michael
> Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 1:42 AM
> To: Michael, Alice <alice.michael at intel.com>; intel-wired-
> lan at lists.osuosl.org
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next PATCH S90 5/8] i40e: Fix multiple issues with
> UDP tunnel offload filter configuration
> 
> From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck at intel.com>
> 
> This fixes at least 2 issues I have found with the UDP tunnel filter
> configuration.
> 
> The first issue is the fact that the tunnels didn't have any sort of mutual
> exlcusion in place to prevent an update from racing with a user request to
> add/remove a port. As such you could request to add and remove a port
> before the port update code had a chance to respond which would result in a
> very confusing result. To address it I have added 2 changes. First I added the
> RTNL mutex wrapper around our updating of the pending, port, and
> filter_index bits. Second I added logic so that we cannot use a port that has a
> pending deletion since we need to free the space in hardware before we can
> allow software to reuse it.
> 
> The second issue addressed is the fact that we were not recording the actual
> filter index provided to us by the admin queue. As a result we were deleting
> filters that were not associated with the actual filter we wanted to delete. To
> fix that I added a filter_index member to the UDP port tracking structure.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e.h      |  2 +
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c | 66
> +++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Tested-by: Andrew Bowers <andrewx.bowers at intel.com>