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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 18:51:17 -0800 From: "Zou, Yi" <yi.zou@...el.com> To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>, "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>, "bphilips@...ell.com" <bphilips@...ell.com>, "Patil, Kiran" <kiran.patil@...el.com> Subject: RE: [net-next-2.6 05/14] vlan: add support to ndo_fcoe_ddp_target() > On Mon, 2011-03-07 at 18:24 -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > > From: Yi Zou <yi.zou@...el.com> > > > > Add the new target ddp offload support ndo_fcoe_ddp_target(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Yi Zou <yi.zou@...el.com> > > Signed-off-by: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@...el.com> > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> > > --- > > net/8021q/vlan_dev.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > > 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c > > index be73753..ae610f0 100644 > > --- a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c > > +++ b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c > > @@ -625,6 +625,19 @@ static int vlan_dev_fcoe_get_wwn(struct net_device > *dev, u64 *wwn, int type) > > rc = ops->ndo_fcoe_get_wwn(real_dev, wwn, type); > > return rc; > > } > > + > > +static int vlan_dev_fcoe_ddp_target(struct net_device *dev, u16 xid, > > + struct scatterlist *sgl, unsigned int sgc) > > +{ > > + struct net_device *real_dev = vlan_dev_info(dev)->real_dev; > > + const struct net_device_ops *ops = real_dev->netdev_ops; > > + int rc = 0; > > + > > + if (ops->ndo_fcoe_ddp_target) > > + rc = ops->ndo_fcoe_ddp_target(real_dev, xid, sgl, sgc); > > + > > + return rc; > > +} > > I can't see a caller or any documentation for this operation, so I don't > know what the semantics are supposed to be. But shouldn't the return > value be -EOPNOTSUPP if real_dev does not implement the operation? > > Ben. This is similar to existing ndo_fcoe_ddp_setup(), but is for target mode, the two are the same on semantics, but the LLD implementation will/may be different depending on the driver as e.g. ,target works on RX_ID where initiator works on OX_ID. The returning of rc being 0 indicates no DDP was setup for this fc exchange, not necessarily EOPNOTSUPP. Thanks, yi > > > #endif > > > > static void vlan_dev_change_rx_flags(struct net_device *dev, int > change) > > @@ -858,6 +871,7 @@ static const struct net_device_ops vlan_netdev_ops > = { > > .ndo_fcoe_enable = vlan_dev_fcoe_enable, > > .ndo_fcoe_disable = vlan_dev_fcoe_disable, > > .ndo_fcoe_get_wwn = vlan_dev_fcoe_get_wwn, > > + .ndo_fcoe_ddp_target = vlan_dev_fcoe_ddp_target, > > #endif > > }; > > > > -- > Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications > Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. > They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists