| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAACQVJpR8OoifuMiArgoSqyYDxiKeZi0B29h7TrX+sktFys-zw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:21:06 +0530
From: Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 09/16] bnxt_en: Refactor bnxt_dl_register()
On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 5:02 PM Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>
> Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 10:03:03AM CET, michael.chan@...adcom.com wrote:
> >From: Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>
> >
> >Define bnxt_dl_params_register() and bnxt_dl_params_unregister()
> >functions and move params register/unregister code to these newly
> >defined functions. This patch is in preparation to register
> >devlink irrespective of firmware spec. version in the next patch.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Vasundhara Volam <vasundhara-v.volam@...adcom.com>
> >Signed-off-by: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
> >---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_devlink.c | 60 ++++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_devlink.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_devlink.c
> >index 0c3d224..9253eed 100644
> >--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_devlink.c
> >+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_devlink.c
> >@@ -485,6 +485,38 @@ static const struct devlink_param bnxt_dl_params[] = {
> > static const struct devlink_param bnxt_dl_port_params[] = {
> > };
> >
> >+static int bnxt_dl_params_register(struct bnxt *bp)
> >+{
> >+ int rc;
> >+
> >+ rc = devlink_params_register(bp->dl, bnxt_dl_params,
> >+ ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_params));
> >+ if (rc) {
> >+ netdev_warn(bp->dev, "devlink_params_register failed. rc=%d",
> >+ rc);
> >+ return rc;
> >+ }
> >+ rc = devlink_port_params_register(&bp->dl_port, bnxt_dl_port_params,
> >+ ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_port_params));
>
> Wait, this assumes that you have 1:1 devlink:devlink_port setup. Is that
> correct? Don't you have other devlink_ports for eswitch representors
> that have params?
Yes Jiri, this assumes 1:1 setup. Our driver does not register params for VFs.
It will register params only for PFs.
This patch is refactoring of code and moving params_registers to a new function,
which will not be called for VFs.
There is a check for PF in bnxt_dl_register() and return before calling
bnxt_dl_params_register(), if check fails.
>
>
> >+ if (rc) {
> >+ netdev_err(bp->dev, "devlink_port_params_register failed");
> >+ devlink_params_unregister(bp->dl, bnxt_dl_params,
> >+ ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_params));
> >+ return rc;
> >+ }
> >+ devlink_params_publish(bp->dl);
> >+
> >+ return 0;
> >+}
> >+
> >+static void bnxt_dl_params_unregister(struct bnxt *bp)
> >+{
> >+ devlink_params_unregister(bp->dl, bnxt_dl_params,
> >+ ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_params));
> >+ devlink_port_params_unregister(&bp->dl_port, bnxt_dl_port_params,
> >+ ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_port_params));
> >+}
> >+
> > int bnxt_dl_register(struct bnxt *bp)
> > {
> > struct devlink *dl;
> >@@ -520,40 +552,24 @@ int bnxt_dl_register(struct bnxt *bp)
> > if (!BNXT_PF(bp))
> > return 0;
> >
> >- rc = devlink_params_register(dl, bnxt_dl_params,
> >- ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_params));
> >- if (rc) {
> >- netdev_warn(bp->dev, "devlink_params_register failed. rc=%d",
> >- rc);
> >- goto err_dl_unreg;
> >- }
> >-
> > devlink_port_attrs_set(&bp->dl_port, DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PHYSICAL,
> > bp->pf.port_id, false, 0,
> > bp->switch_id, sizeof(bp->switch_id));
> > rc = devlink_port_register(dl, &bp->dl_port, bp->pf.port_id);
> > if (rc) {
> > netdev_err(bp->dev, "devlink_port_register failed");
> >- goto err_dl_param_unreg;
> >+ goto err_dl_unreg;
> > }
> > devlink_port_type_eth_set(&bp->dl_port, bp->dev);
> >
> >- rc = devlink_port_params_register(&bp->dl_port, bnxt_dl_port_params,
> >- ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_port_params));
> >- if (rc) {
> >- netdev_err(bp->dev, "devlink_port_params_register failed");
> >+ rc = bnxt_dl_params_register(bp);
> >+ if (rc)
> > goto err_dl_port_unreg;
> >- }
> >-
> >- devlink_params_publish(dl);
> >
> > return 0;
> >
> > err_dl_port_unreg:
> > devlink_port_unregister(&bp->dl_port);
> >-err_dl_param_unreg:
> >- devlink_params_unregister(dl, bnxt_dl_params,
> >- ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_params));
> > err_dl_unreg:
> > devlink_unregister(dl);
> > err_dl_free:
> >@@ -570,12 +586,8 @@ void bnxt_dl_unregister(struct bnxt *bp)
> > return;
> >
> > if (BNXT_PF(bp)) {
> >- devlink_port_params_unregister(&bp->dl_port,
> >- bnxt_dl_port_params,
> >- ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_port_params));
> >+ bnxt_dl_params_unregister(bp);
> > devlink_port_unregister(&bp->dl_port);
> >- devlink_params_unregister(dl, bnxt_dl_params,
> >- ARRAY_SIZE(bnxt_dl_params));
> > }
> > devlink_unregister(dl);
> > devlink_free(dl);
> >--
> >2.5.1
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists