On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:10:22AM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 11:10:50AM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:18:27PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 10:45:18PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 07:21:24PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > > > > > This wasn't explicitly caught before causing a program abort: > > > > > > > > > > | BUG: invalid range expression type set reference > > > > > | nft: expression.c:1162: range_expr_value_low: Assertion `0' failed. > > > > > | zsh: abort sudo ./install/sbin/nft add rule t c meta mark set tcp dport map '{ @s : 23 } > > > > > > > > > > With this patch in place, the error message is way more descriptive: > > > > > > > > > > | Error: Key can't be set reference > > > > > | add rule t c meta mark set tcp dport map { @s : 23 } > > > > > | ^^ > > > > > > > > I wanted to check why the parser allow for this... > > > > > > For set elements or LHS parts of map elements, there is set_lhs_expr. > > > The latter may be concat_rhs_expr or multiton_rhs_expr. concat_rhs_expr > > > eventually resolves into primary_rhs_expr which may be symbol_expr. > > > > > > BTW, it seems like from parser side, set references on map element's > > > RHS are allowed as well. > > > > > > IMHO, parser_bison.y slowly but steadily turns into a can of worms. :( > > > > On a second look, I start wondering whether symbol_expr was a wise > > choice: This thing combines variables ('$' identifier), "unidentified" > > strings and set references (AT identifier). > > > > With symbol_expr being listed in both primary_expr and primary_rhs_expr, > > set references are allowed about anywhere - even in concatenations or > > any binary operation. > > It would be probably good to restrict set references to where it makes > sense only. This is good for the grammar and we don't need to validate > all possible invalid combinations from the evaluation step. ACK! > Would you have a look or you think it's too complicated to attack this > from the parser? It's not too complicated, but I sometimes feel like turning adjuster screws on a machine I don't understand. OK, given that parser_bison.y was initially written by Patrick, you're probably in the same situation. :) Cheers, Phil