[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <24fd3d18-0c09-8235-c88d-d7e151110ebe@molgen.mpg.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 15:17:19 +0100
From: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Yan Vugenfirer <yan@...nix.com>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igbvf: Regard vf reset nack as success
Dear Akihiko,
Thank you for your patch.
Am 22.11.22 um 10:27 schrieb Akihiko Odaki:
> vf reset nack actually represents the reset operation itself is
> performed but no address is not assigned. Therefore, e1000_reset_hw_vf
Is … no … not assigned … intentional?
> should fill the "perm_addr" with the zero address and return success on
> such an occassion. This prevents its callers in netdev.c from saying PF
occasion
> still resetting, and instead allows them to correctly report that no
> address is assigned.
In what environment do you hit the problem?
[…]
Kind regards,
Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists