netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] hinic: add set_channels ethtool

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <595eb127-53ce-dea7-7289-78f53fd8d6bc@huawei.com>
Date:   Sat, 16 May 2020 10:58:27 +0800
From:   "luobin (L)" <luobin9@...wei.com>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <luoxianjun@...wei.com>, <yin.yinshi@...wei.com>,
        <cloud.wangxiaoyun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] hinic: add set_channels ethtool_ops support


On 2020/5/16 2:13, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:35:47AM +0000, Luo bin wrote:
>> add support to change TX/RX queue number with ethtool -L
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luo bin <luobin9@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>   .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_ethtool.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++--
>>   .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_hw_dev.c  |  7 ++
>>   .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_hw_dev.h  |  2 +
>>   .../net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_main.c    |  5 +-
>>   drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_tx.c  |  5 ++
>>   5 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_ethtool.c
>> index ace18d258049..92a0e3bd19c3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_ethtool.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic/hinic_ethtool.c
>> @@ -619,14 +619,68 @@ static void hinic_get_channels(struct net_device *netdev,
>>   	struct hinic_dev *nic_dev = netdev_priv(netdev);
>>   	struct hinic_hwdev *hwdev = nic_dev->hwdev;
>>   
>> -	channels->max_rx = hwdev->nic_cap.max_qps;
>> -	channels->max_tx = hwdev->nic_cap.max_qps;
>> +	channels->max_rx = 0;
>> +	channels->max_tx = 0;
>>   	channels->max_other = 0;
>> -	channels->max_combined = 0;
>> -	channels->rx_count = hinic_hwdev_num_qps(hwdev);
>> -	channels->tx_count = hinic_hwdev_num_qps(hwdev);
>> +	channels->max_combined = nic_dev->max_qps;
>> +	channels->rx_count = 0;
>> +	channels->tx_count = 0;
>>   	channels->other_count = 0;
>> -	channels->combined_count = 0;
>> +	channels->combined_count = hinic_hwdev_num_qps(hwdev);
>> +}
>> +
>> +int hinic_set_channels(struct net_device *netdev,
>> +		       struct ethtool_channels *channels)
>> +{
>> +	struct hinic_dev *nic_dev = netdev_priv(netdev);
>> +	unsigned int count = channels->combined_count;
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	if (!count) {
>> +		netif_err(nic_dev, drv, netdev,
>> +			  "Unsupported combined_count: 0\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	if (channels->tx_count || channels->rx_count || channels->other_count) {
>> +		netif_err(nic_dev, drv, netdev,
>> +			  "Setting rx/tx/other count not supported\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
> With max_* reported as 0, these will be caught in ethnl_set_channels()
> or ethtool_set_channels().
> ---Will fix. Thanks
>> +	if (!(nic_dev->flags & HINIC_RSS_ENABLE)) {
>> +		netif_err(nic_dev, drv, netdev,
>> +			  "This function doesn't support RSS, only support 1 queue pair\n");
>> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> +	}
> I'm not sure if the request should fail even if requested count is
> actually 1.
>
>> +	if (count > nic_dev->max_qps) {
>> +		netif_err(nic_dev, drv, netdev,
>> +			  "Combined count %d exceeds limit %d\n",
>> +			  count, nic_dev->max_qps);
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
> As above, this check has been already performed in ethnl_set_channels()
> or ethtool_set_channels().
> ---Will fix. Thanks
>> +	netif_info(nic_dev, drv, netdev, "Set max combined queue number from %d to %d\n",
>> +		   hinic_hwdev_num_qps(nic_dev->hwdev), count);
> We have netlink notifications now, is it necessary to log successful
> changes?
> ---I think it contributes to locating defects for developers.
>
> Michal
> .