RE: [PATCH net-next 3/6] flow_offload: add flow_rule_no_control_flags()

[Baowen Zheng]

>> On April 8, 2024 9:09 PM, Asbjørn wrote:
>>
>>> This helper can be used by drivers, that doesn't support any control
>>> flags, to reject any attempt to install rules with control flags.
>>>
>>> This is aimed at drivers, which uses flow_rule_match_control(), but
>>> doesn't implement any control flags.
>>>
>>> Only compile-tested.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> include/net/flow_offload.h | 13 +++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/net/flow_offload.h b/include/net/flow_offload.h
>>> index c1317b14da08c..415d225204a1f 100644
>>> --- a/include/net/flow_offload.h
>>> +++ b/include/net/flow_offload.h
>>> @@ -471,6 +471,19 @@ static inline bool
>>> flow_rule_no_unsupp_control_flags(const u32 supp_flags,
>>> 	return false;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +/**
>>> + * flow_rule_no_control_flags() - check for presence of any control
>>> +flags
>>> + * @flags: flags present in rule
>>> + * @extack: The netlink extended ACK for reporting errors.
>>> + *
>>> + * Returns true if no control flags are set, false otherwise.
>>> + */
>>> +static inline bool flow_rule_no_control_flags(const u32 flags,
>>> +					      struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) {
>>> +	return flow_rule_no_unsupp_control_flags(0, flags, extack); }
>>> +
>> How about to squash this change with series I patch since they have similar
>functions for driver to use.
>
>Do you have a link to the series, couldn't find it on the netdev list.
Sorry for confusing you. I mean if you can squash this change with your first patch which introduce the function of flow_rule_no_unsupp_control_flags.
>
>--
>Best regards
>Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen
>Network Engineer
>Fiberby - AS42541