[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200220.101101.1993510182065744262.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 10:11:01 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: esben@...nix.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
michal.simek@...inx.com, ynezz@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] net: ll_temac: Add more error handling of
dma_map_single() calls
From: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 09:32:58 +0100
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:
>
>> From: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
>> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 11:54:00 +0100
>>
>>> @@ -863,12 +865,13 @@ temac_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *ndev)
>>> skb_dma_addr = dma_map_single(ndev->dev.parent, skb->data,
>>> skb_headlen(skb), DMA_TO_DEVICE);
>>> cur_p->len = cpu_to_be32(skb_headlen(skb));
>>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(dma_mapping_error(ndev->dev.parent, skb_dma_addr)))
>>> + return NETDEV_TX_BUSY;
>>
>> The appropriate behavior in this situation is to drop the packet and return
>> NETDEV_TX_OK.
>
> Ok, and I guess the same goes for the error handling of dma_map_single()
> of one of the fragments later in same function.
Yes.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists