[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210527091951.7db60cc8@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 09:19:51 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Gatis Peisenieks <gatis@...rotik.com>
Cc: chris.snook@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, hkallweit1@...il.com,
jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, dchickles@...vell.com,
tully@...rotik.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] atl1c: add 4 RX/TX queue support for
Mikrotik 10/25G NIC
On Thu, 27 May 2021 16:49:22 +0300 Gatis Peisenieks wrote:
> On 2021-05-27 04:16, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >> +/**
> >> + * atl1c_clean_rx - NAPI Rx polling callback
> >> + * @napi: napi info
> >> + * @budget: limit of packets to clean
> >> + */
> >> +static int atl1c_clean_rx(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> >> {
> >> + struct atl1c_rrd_ring *rrd_ring =
> >> + container_of(napi, struct atl1c_rrd_ring, napi);
> >> + struct atl1c_adapter *adapter = rrd_ring->adapter;
> >> + int work_done = 0;
> >> + unsigned long flags;
> >> u16 rfd_num, rfd_index;
> >> - u16 count = 0;
> >> u16 length;
> >> struct pci_dev *pdev = adapter->pdev;
> >> struct net_device *netdev = adapter->netdev;
> >> - struct atl1c_rfd_ring *rfd_ring = &adapter->rfd_ring;
> >> - struct atl1c_rrd_ring *rrd_ring = &adapter->rrd_ring;
> >> + struct atl1c_rfd_ring *rfd_ring = &adapter->rfd_ring[rrd_ring->num];
> >> struct sk_buff *skb;
> >> struct atl1c_recv_ret_status *rrs;
> >> struct atl1c_buffer *buffer_info;
> >>
> >> + /* Keep link state information with original netdev */
> >> + if (!netif_carrier_ok(adapter->netdev))
> >> + goto quit_polling;
> >
> > Interesting, I see you only move this code, but why does this driver
> > stop reading packets when link goes down? Surely there may be packets
> > already on the ring which Linux should process?
>
> Jakub, I do not know what possible HW quirks this check might be
> covering up, so I left it there. If you feel it is safe to remove
> I can do a separate patch for that. I think it is fine for the
> HW I work with, but that is far from everything this driver supports.
No strong feelings either way. I was mostly surprised to see such code,
so I thought I'd ask in case you knew why it was there.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists