[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <F4CC6FACFEB3C54C9141D49AD221F7F91A716DDE@lhreml503-mbx>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:07:27 +0000
From: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC: "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
"Huwei (Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@...wei.com>,
oulijun <oulijun@...wei.com>,
"Zhuangyuzeng (Yisen)" <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
"xuwei (O)" <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>,
"mehta.salil.lnk@...il.com" <mehta.salil.lnk@...il.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
"chenguolong (A)" <luck.chen@...wei.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH for-next 16/20] IB/hns: Validate mtu when modified qp
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leon Romanovsky [mailto:leon@...nel.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 7:33 AM
> To: Salil Mehta
> Cc: dledford@...hat.com; Huwei (Xavier); oulijun; Zhuangyuzeng (Yisen);
> xuwei (O); mehta.salil.lnk@...il.com; linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Linuxarm; chenguolong (A)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 16/20] IB/hns: Validate mtu when modified
> qp
>
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 06:30:47PM +0800, Salil Mehta wrote:
> > From: Lijun Ou <oulijun@...wei.com>
> >
> > The mtu should be validated when modify qp,so we check it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@...wei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Chen <luck.chen@...wei.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Wei Hu (Xavier) <xavier.huwei@...wei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> > index 51fefbf..1c5be59 100644
> > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_qp.c
> > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> > */
> >
> > #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <rdma/ib_addr.h>
> > #include <rdma/ib_umem.h>
> > #include "hns_roce_common.h"
> > #include "hns_roce_device.h"
> > @@ -658,6 +659,7 @@ int hns_roce_modify_qp(struct ib_qp *ibqp, struct
> ib_qp_attr *attr,
> > struct device *dev = &hr_dev->pdev->dev;
> > int ret = -EINVAL;
> > int p;
> > + u32 active_mtu = 0;
>
> There is no need to assign value to a variable which will be
> overwritten.
Agreed. This initialization seems redundant. Will remove. Thanks!
Best regards
Salil
>
> >
> > mutex_lock(&hr_qp->mutex);
> >
> > @@ -688,6 +690,19 @@ int hns_roce_modify_qp(struct ib_qp *ibqp,
> struct ib_qp_attr *attr,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + if (attr_mask & IB_QP_PATH_MTU) {
> > + p = attr_mask & IB_QP_PORT ? (attr->port_num - 1) : hr_qp-
> >port;
> > + active_mtu = iboe_get_mtu(hr_dev->iboe.netdevs[p]->mtu);
>
> ib_mtu iboe_get_mtu returns "enum ib_mtu" and not u32.
Ok. This can be converted to 'enum'. Will change. Thanks!
Best regards
Salil
>
> > +
> > + if (attr->path_mtu > IB_MTU_2048 ||
> > + attr->path_mtu < IB_MTU_256 ||
> > + attr->path_mtu > active_mtu) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "attr path_mtu(%d)invalid while modify
> qp",
> > + attr->path_mtu);
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > if (attr_mask & IB_QP_MAX_QP_RD_ATOMIC &&
> > attr->max_rd_atomic > hr_dev->caps.max_qp_init_rdma) {
> > dev_err(dev, "attr max_rd_atomic invalid.attr-
> >max_rd_atomic=%d\n",
> > --
> > 1.7.9.5
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma"
> in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists