[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210210144341.GC741034@unreal>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:43:41 +0200
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: vladbu@...dia.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [bug report] net/mlx5e: E-Switch, Maintain vhca_id to vport_num
mapping
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 03:28:01PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 01:48:20PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 11:51:51AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > Hello Vlad Buslov,
> > >
> > > The patch 84ae9c1f29c0: "net/mlx5e: E-Switch, Maintain vhca_id to
> > > vport_num mapping" from Sep 23, 2020, leads to the following static
> > > checker warning:
> > >
> > > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/vport.c:1170 mlx5_vport_get_other_func_cap()
> > > warn: odd binop '0x0 & 0x1'
> > >
> > > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/vport.c
> > > 1168 int mlx5_vport_get_other_func_cap(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev, u16 function_id, void *out)
> > > 1169 {
> > > 1170 u16 opmod = (MLX5_CAP_GENERAL << 1) | (HCA_CAP_OPMOD_GET_MAX & 0x01);
> > >
> > > HCA_CAP_OPMOD_GET_MAX is zero. The 0x01 is a magical number.
> > >
> > > 1171 u8 in[MLX5_ST_SZ_BYTES(query_hca_cap_in)] = {};
> > > 1172
> > > 1173 MLX5_SET(query_hca_cap_in, in, opcode, MLX5_CMD_OP_QUERY_HCA_CAP);
> > > 1174 MLX5_SET(query_hca_cap_in, in, op_mod, opmod);
> > > 1175 MLX5_SET(query_hca_cap_in, in, function_id, function_id);
> > > 1176 MLX5_SET(query_hca_cap_in, in, other_function, true);
> > > 1177 return mlx5_cmd_exec_inout(dev, query_hca_cap, in, out);
> > > 1178 }
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > I'm running smatch which is based on 6193b3b71beb ("extra: fix some error pointer handling")
> > and I don't see this error. Should I run something special?
> >
>
> This check is too crap to publish.
>
> The heuristic was "a bitwise AND which always results in zero" but a lot
> of code does stuff like: "data = 0x00 << 0 | 0x04 << 8 | 0x12 << 16;"
> I could never figure out a way to make the check useful enough to
> publish.
But you can warn about simple cases like above, which is constant zero
AND something.
Thanks
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists