[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b1fc9bd7-5f8d-8bf6-1d9d-956cef0311e4@solarflare.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 17:26:04 +0100
From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To: Charles McLachlan <cmclachlan@...arflare.com>,
<davem@...emloft.net>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
<brouer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/6] sfc: perform XDP processing on received
packets.
On 22/10/2019 16:38, Charles McLachlan wrote:
> Adds a field to hold an attached xdp_prog, but never populates it (see
> following patch). Also, XDP_TX support is deferred to a later patch
> in the series.
>
> Signed-off-by: Charles McLachlan <cmclachlan@...arflare.com>
> ---
<snip>
> @@ -764,6 +872,16 @@ void efx_init_rx_queue(struct efx_rx_queue *rx_queue)
> rx_queue->fast_fill_trigger = trigger;
> rx_queue->refill_enabled = true;
>
> + /* Initialise XDP queue information */
> + rc = xdp_rxq_info_reg(&rx_queue->xdp_rxq_info, efx->net_dev,
> + rx_queue->core_index);
> +
> + if (rc) {
> + netif_err(efx, rx_err, efx->net_dev,
> + "Failure to initialise XDP queue information rc=%d\n",
> + rc);
> + }
What happens if we try to use XDP after this has failed?
Should we set some kind of "XDP broken" flag to prevent that?
-Ed
Powered by blists - more mailing lists