[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250507092832.GA3339421@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 10:28:32 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Tanmay Jagdale <tanmay@...vell.com>
Cc: bbrezillon@...nel.org, arno@...isbad.org, schalla@...vell.com,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
sgoutham@...vell.com, lcherian@...vell.com, gakula@...vell.com,
jerinj@...vell.com, hkelam@...vell.com, sbhatta@...vell.com,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, bbhushan2@...vell.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
pstanner@...hat.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
peterz@...radead.org, linux@...blig.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org, giovanni.cabiddu@...el.com,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, rkannoth@...vell.com, sumang@...vell.com,
gcherian@...vell.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v1 04/15] octeontx2-af: Handle inbound inline
ipsec config in AF
On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 10:19:18AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 06:49:45PM +0530, Tanmay Jagdale wrote:
> > From: Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@...vell.com>
...
> > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/marvell/octeontx2/otx2_cptpf_mbox.c b/drivers/crypto/marvell/octeontx2/otx2_cptpf_mbox.c
> > index 5e6f70ac35a7..222419bd5ac9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/crypto/marvell/octeontx2/otx2_cptpf_mbox.c
> > +++ b/drivers/crypto/marvell/octeontx2/otx2_cptpf_mbox.c
> > @@ -326,9 +326,6 @@ static int cptpf_handle_vf_req(struct otx2_cptpf_dev *cptpf,
> > case MBOX_MSG_GET_KVF_LIMITS:
> > err = handle_msg_kvf_limits(cptpf, vf, req);
> > break;
> > - case MBOX_MSG_RX_INLINE_IPSEC_LF_CFG:
> > - err = handle_msg_rx_inline_ipsec_lf_cfg(cptpf, req);
> > - break;
> >
> > default:
> > err = forward_to_af(cptpf, vf, req, size);
>
> This removes the only caller of handle_msg_rx_inline_ipsec_lf_cfg()
> Which in turn removes the only caller of rx_inline_ipsec_lf_cfg(),
> and in turn send_inline_ipsec_inbound_msg().
>
> Those functions should be removed by the same patch that makes the changes
> above. Which I think could be split into a separate patch from the changes
> below.
Sorry for not noticing before I sent my previous email,
but I now see that those functions are removed by the following patch.
But I do think this needs to be re-arranged a bit to avoid regressions
wrt W=1 builds.
...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists