linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx ops support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6981CF6C1312658E+20250821014411.GB1742451@nic-Precision-5820-Tower>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:44:11 +0800
From: Yibo Dong <dong100@...se.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
	corbet@....net, gur.stavi@...wei.com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
	mpe@...erman.id.au, danishanwar@...com, lee@...ger.us,
	gongfan1@...wei.com, lorenzo@...nel.org, geert+renesas@...der.be,
	Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com, lukas.bulwahn@...hat.com,
	alexanderduyck@...com, richardcochran@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx ops support

On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:23:44PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * mucse_mbx_get_ack - Read ack from reg
> > + * @mbx: pointer to the MBX structure
> > + * @reg: register to read
> > + *
> > + * @return: the ack value
> > + **/
> > +static u16 mucse_mbx_get_ack(struct mucse_mbx_info *mbx, int reg)
> > +{
> > +	return (mbx_data_rd32(mbx, reg) >> 16);
> > +}
> 
> > +static int mucse_check_for_ack_pf(struct mucse_hw *hw)
> > +{
> > +	struct mucse_mbx_info *mbx = &hw->mbx;
> > +	u16 hw_fw_ack;
> > +
> > +	hw_fw_ack = mucse_mbx_get_ack(mbx, MBX_FW2PF_COUNTER);
> 
> > +int mucse_write_mbx_pf(struct mucse_hw *hw, u32 *msg, u16 size)
> > +{
> > +	struct mucse_mbx_info *mbx = &hw->mbx;
> > +	int size_inwords = size / 4;
> > +	u32 ctrl_reg;
> > +	int ret;
> > +	int i;
> > +
> > +	ctrl_reg = PF2FW_MBOX_CTRL(mbx);
> > +	ret = mucse_obtain_mbx_lock_pf(hw);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < size_inwords; i++)
> > +		mbx_data_wr32(mbx, MBX_FW_PF_SHM_DATA + i * 4, msg[i]);
> > +
> > +	/* flush msg and acks as we are overwriting the message buffer */
> > +	hw->mbx.fw_ack = mucse_mbx_get_ack(mbx, MBX_FW2PF_COUNTER);
> 
> It seems like the ACK is always at MBX_FW2PF_COUNTER. So why pass it
> to mucse_mbx_get_ack()? Please look at your other getters and setters.
> 

'mucse_mbx_get_ack' is always at MBX_FW2PF_COUNTER now, just for pf-fw mbx. 
But, in the future, there will be pf-vf mbx with different input.
Should I move 'MBX_FW2PF_COUNTER' to function 'mucse_mbx_get_ack', and
update the function when I add vf relative code in the future?

> > +/**
> > + * mucse_write_mbx - Write a message to the mailbox
> > + * @hw: pointer to the HW structure
> > + * @msg: the message buffer
> > + * @size: length of buffer
> > + *
> > + * @return: 0 on success, negative on failure
> > + **/
> > +int mucse_write_mbx(struct mucse_hw *hw, u32 *msg, u16 size)
> > +{
> > +	return mucse_write_mbx_pf(hw, msg, size);
> > +}
> 
> This function does not do anything useful. Why not call
> mucse_write_mbx_pf() directly?
> 

Yes, I should call it directly. 

> > +/**
> > + * mucse_check_for_msg - Check to see if fw sent us mail
> > + * @hw: pointer to the HW structure
> > + *
> > + * @return: 0 on success, negative on failure
> > + **/
> > +int mucse_check_for_msg(struct mucse_hw *hw)
> > +{
> > +	return mucse_check_for_msg_pf(hw);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * mucse_check_for_ack - Check to see if fw sent us ACK
> > + * @hw: pointer to the HW structure
> > + *
> > + * @return: 0 on success, negative on failure
> > + **/
> > +int mucse_check_for_ack(struct mucse_hw *hw)
> > +{
> > +	return mucse_check_for_ack_pf(hw);
> > +}
> 
> These as well.

Got it, I will update it.

> 
> 	Andrew
> 

Thanks for your feedback.