linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] hinic: add rss support

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]

Message-Id: <20190610.090402.1076127429444175164.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jun 2019 09:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     xuechaojing@...wei.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        luoshaokai@...wei.com, cloud.wangxiaoyun@...wei.com,
        chiqijun@...wei.com, wulike1@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] hinic: add rss support

From: Xue Chaojing <xuechaojing@...wei.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 03:34:54 +0000

> This patch adds rss support for the HINIC driver.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xue Chaojing <xuechaojing@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_dev.h |  26 ++
>  .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_hw_dev.c  |  10 +-
>  .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_hw_dev.h  |  26 ++
>  .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_hw_wqe.h  |  16 ++
>  .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_main.c    | 131 ++++++++-
>  .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_port.c    | 253 ++++++++++++++++++
>  .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_port.h    |  82 ++++++
>  7 files changed, 536 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_dev.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_dev.h
> index 5186cc9023aa..8065180344d2 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_dev.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_dev.h
> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
>  enum hinic_flags {
>  	HINIC_LINK_UP = BIT(0),
>  	HINIC_INTF_UP = BIT(1),
> +	HINIC_RSS_ENABLE = BIT(3),
>  };

Why not "BIT(2)"?

Also, please always provide an appropriate cover letter for a patch series.