[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<AS8PR04MB88494082BF14B480936F6DA996452@AS8PR04MB8849.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 16:33:49 +0000
From: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>
To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "kuba@...nel.org"
<kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, "robh@...nel.org"
<robh@...nel.org>, "krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Vladimir Oltean
<vladimir.oltean@....com>, Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>, Frank Li
<frank.li@....com>, "christophe.leroy@...roup.eu"
<christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, "linux@...linux.org.uk"
<linux@...linux.org.uk>, "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>
CC: "imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "devicetree@...r.kernel.org"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 net-next 10/13] net: enetc: extract
enetc_int_vector_init/destroy() from enetc_alloc_msix()
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 3:59 PM
[...]
> Subject: [PATCH v2 net-next 10/13] net: enetc: extract
> enetc_int_vector_init/destroy() from enetc_alloc_msix()
>
> From: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>
>
> Extract enetc_int_vector_init() and enetc_int_vector_destroy() from
> enetc_alloc_msix() so that the code is more concise and readable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
> ---
> v2 changes:
> This patch is separated from v1 patch 9 ("net: enetc: optimize the
> allocation of tx_bdr"). Separate enetc_int_vector_init() from the
> original patch. In addition, add new help function
> enetc_int_vector_destroy().
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c | 174 +++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+), 87 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c
> index 032d8eadd003..d36af3f8ba31 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c
> @@ -2965,6 +2965,87 @@ int enetc_ioctl(struct net_device *ndev, struct
> ifreq *rq, int cmd)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(enetc_ioctl);
>
> +static int enetc_int_vector_init(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv, int i,
> + int v_tx_rings)
> +{
> + struct enetc_int_vector *v __free(kfree);
> + struct enetc_bdr *bdr;
> + int j, err;
> +
> + v = kzalloc(struct_size(v, tx_ring, v_tx_rings), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!v)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + bdr = &v->rx_ring;
> + bdr->index = i;
> + bdr->ndev = priv->ndev;
> + bdr->dev = priv->dev;
> + bdr->bd_count = priv->rx_bd_count;
> + bdr->buffer_offset = ENETC_RXB_PAD;
> + priv->rx_ring[i] = bdr;
> +
> + err = xdp_rxq_info_reg(&bdr->xdp.rxq, priv->ndev, i, 0);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + err = xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(&bdr->xdp.rxq,
> + MEM_TYPE_PAGE_SHARED, NULL);
> + if (err) {
> + xdp_rxq_info_unreg(&bdr->xdp.rxq);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + /* init defaults for adaptive IC */
> + if (priv->ic_mode & ENETC_IC_RX_ADAPTIVE) {
> + v->rx_ictt = 0x1;
> + v->rx_dim_en = true;
> + }
> +
> + INIT_WORK(&v->rx_dim.work, enetc_rx_dim_work);
> + netif_napi_add(priv->ndev, &v->napi, enetc_poll);
> + v->count_tx_rings = v_tx_rings;
> +
> + for (j = 0; j < v_tx_rings; j++) {
> + int idx;
> +
> + /* default tx ring mapping policy */
> + idx = priv->bdr_int_num * j + i;
> + __set_bit(idx, &v->tx_rings_map);
> + bdr = &v->tx_ring[j];
> + bdr->index = idx;
> + bdr->ndev = priv->ndev;
> + bdr->dev = priv->dev;
> + bdr->bd_count = priv->tx_bd_count;
> + priv->tx_ring[idx] = bdr;
> + }
> +
> + priv->int_vector[i] = no_free_ptr(v);
This is new, and looks like it's a fix on its own. It's fixing a dangling reference in int_vectror[i],
if I'm not wrong.
Other than that, like for the original patch:
Reviewed-by: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists