[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250916091823.3fc6ef72@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 09:18:23 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon
Horman <horms@...nel.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Jason
Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, Eugenio
Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn
<andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, Lei Yang
<leiyang@...hat.com>, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/8] net: ethtool: add get_rx_ring_count
callback to optimize RX ring queries
On Mon, 15 Sep 2025 03:47:29 -0700 Breno Leitao wrote:
> @@ -1217,7 +1237,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack int ethtool_get_rxrings(struct net_device *dev,
> size_t info_size;
> int ret;
>
> - if (!ops->get_rxnfc)
> + if (!ops->get_rxnfc && !ops->get_rx_ring_count)
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
There's inconsistency in how we check for the ops being present.
Here we check for get_rxnfc and the new callback.
But ethtool_set_rxfh() and ethtool_set_rxfh_indir() are only checking
for get_rxnfc. I suppose we can remove the explicit ops checks and
let ethtool_get_rx_ring_count() return EOPNOTSUPP?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists