netdev - Re: [PATCH V5 for-next 16/21] RDMA/bnxt_re: Support poll

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:47:10 +0530
From:   Selvin Xavier <selvin.xavier@...adcom.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eddie Wai <eddie.wai@...adcom.com>,
        Devesh Sharma <devesh.sharma@...adcom.com>,
        Somnath Kotur <somnath.kotur@...adcom.com>,
        Sriharsha Basavapatna <sriharsha.basavapatna@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 for-next 16/21] RDMA/bnxt_re: Support poll_cq verb

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
>> +static u8 __rc_to_ib_wc_status(u8 qstatus)
>> +{
>> +     switch (qstatus) {
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_OK:
>> +             return IB_WC_SUCCESS;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_ACCESS_ERROR:
>> +             return IB_WC_LOC_ACCESS_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_LENGTH_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_LOC_LEN_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_PROTECTION_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_LOC_PROT_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_QP_OPERATION_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_LOC_QP_OP_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_MEMORY_MGT_OPERATION_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_GENERAL_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_REMOTE_INVALID_REQUEST_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_REM_INV_REQ_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_WORK_REQUEST_FLUSHED_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR;
>> +     case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_HW_FLUSH_ERR:
>> +             return IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR;
>> +     default:
>> +             return IB_WC_GENERAL_ERR;
>> +     }
>> +}
>> +
>
> Why don't you use these defines directly?

CQ_RES* values are returned by the HW and these values are
different from the corresponding IB_WC status values.   say,
CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_HW_FLUSH_ERR is 8 where as
IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR is 5.
So we thought it is better to map these values in a function rather
than having a switch/case in the calling function.

Let me know if you meant something different in your query.