[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJpBn1yKjrOMqA1OAi_JS9mqL6ygtioz-1+3K7Q83--a_LDELw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 11:51:50 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: "Mintz, Yuval" <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"oss-drivers@...ronome.com" <oss-drivers@...ronome.com>,
"dinan.gunawardena@...ronome.com" <dinan.gunawardena@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 7/7] nfp: allow application firmware to limit
number of SR-IOV VFs
On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Mintz, Yuval <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com> wrote:
>> +static void nfp_pcie_sriov_read_nfd_limit(struct nfp_pf *pf)
>> +{
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + pf->limit_vfs = nfp_rtsym_read_le(pf->cpp, "nfd_vf_cfg_max_vfs",
>> &err);
>> + if (!err)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + pf->limit_vfs = ~0;
>> + /* Allow any setting for backwards compatibility if symbol not found
>> */
>> + if (err != -ENOENT)
>> + nfp_warn(pf->cpp, "Warning: VF limit read failed: %d\n", err);
>> +}
>> +
>
> If you're only going to use this under CONFIG_PCI_IOV,
> perhaps put this underneath the ifdef as well?
Sure, I have a slight preference to not use ifdefs unless necessary,
but I guess the body of this function could be under an ifdef without
making things too ugly.. Thanks :) Testing almost done, v2 coming
shortly.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists