[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ed49eed8-3e0f-4bda-aa30-f581005c4865@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 13:09:42 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Paul Fertser <fercerpav@...il.com>, kalavakunta.hari.prasad@...il.com
Cc: sam@...dozajonas.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, horms@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npeacock@...a.com, akozlov@...a.com,
hkalavakunta@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: ncsi: Fix GCPS 64-bit member variables
On 4/11/25 1:22 PM, Paul Fertser wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:22:47AM -0700, kalavakunta.hari.prasad@...il.com wrote:
>> From: Hari Kalavakunta <kalavakunta.hari.prasad@...il.com>
>>
>> Correct Get Controller Packet Statistics (GCPS) 64-bit wide member
>> variables, as per DSP0222 v1.0.0 and forward specs. The Driver currently
>> collects these stats, but they are yet to be exposed to the user.
>> Therefore, no user impact.
>>
>> Statistics fixes:
>> Total Bytes Received (byte range 28..35)
>> Total Bytes Transmitted (byte range 36..43)
>> Total Unicast Packets Received (byte range 44..51)
>> Total Multicast Packets Received (byte range 52..59)
>> Total Broadcast Packets Received (byte range 60..67)
>> Total Unicast Packets Transmitted (byte range 68..75)
>> Total Multicast Packets Transmitted (byte range 76..83)
>> Total Broadcast Packets Transmitted (byte range 84..91)
>> Valid Bytes Received (byte range 204..11)
>>
>> v2:
>> - __be64 for all 64 bit GCPS counters
>>
>> v3:
>> - be64_to_cpup() instead of be64_to_cpu()
>
> Usually the changelog should go after --- so it's not included in the
> final commit message when merged. I hope in this case the maintainers
> will take care of this manually so no need to resend unless they ask
> to.
>
> Other than that,
>
> Reviewed-by: Paul Fertser <fercerpav@...il.com>
@Paul: it's not clear to me if as a consequence of the discussion
running on v2 of this patch you prefer reverting back to be64_to_cpu().
The packet alignement should yield to the correct code in both cases.
/P
Powered by blists - more mailing lists