[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210426064736.7efynita4brzos4u@spock.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 08:47:36 +0200
From: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [igb] netconsole triggers warning in netpoll_poll_dev
Hello.
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 03:58:36PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 10:19:44 +0200 Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 04:06:29PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 11:07 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > Sure, that's simplest. I wasn't sure something is supposed to prevent
> > > > this condition or if it's okay to cover it up.
> > >
> > > I'm pretty sure it is okay to cover it up. In this case the "budget -
> > > 1" is supposed to be the upper limit on what can be reported. I think
> > > it was assuming an unsigned value anyway.
> > >
> > > Another alternative would be to default clean_complete to !!budget.
> > > Then if budget is 0 clean_complete would always return false.
> >
> > So, among all the variants, which one to try? Or there was a separate
> > patch sent to address this?
>
> Alex's suggestion is probably best.
>
> I'm not aware of the fix being posted. Perhaps you could take over and
> post the patch if Intel doesn't chime in?
So, IIUC, Alex suggests this:
```
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
index a45cd2b416c8..7503d5bf168a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
@@ -7981,7 +7981,7 @@ static int igb_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
struct igb_q_vector,
napi);
bool clean_complete = true;
- int work_done = 0;
+ unsigned int work_done = 0;
#ifdef CONFIG_IGB_DCA
if (q_vector->adapter->flags & IGB_FLAG_DCA_ENABLED)
@@ -8008,7 +8008,7 @@ static int igb_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
if (likely(napi_complete_done(napi, work_done)))
igb_ring_irq_enable(q_vector);
- return min(work_done, budget - 1);
+ return min_t(unsigned int, work_done, budget - 1);
}
/**
```
Am I right?
Thanks.
--
Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists