netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: hinic: Add control command support for VF PMD driver in DPDK

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 PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 16:52:55 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Cai Huoqing <cai.huoqing@...ux.dev>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Zhengchao Shao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com>,
        Bin Chen <bin.chen@...igine.com>,
        Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
        Peter Chen <peter.chen@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: hinic: Add control command support for VF PMD
 driver in DPDK

On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 15:53:35 +0800 Cai Huoqing wrote:
> On 28 10月 22 08:56:51, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > if the cmd is not added to 'nic_cmd_support_vf',
> > > the PF will return false, and the error messsage "PF Receive VFx
> > > unsupported cmd x" in the function 'hinic_mbox_check_cmd_valid',
> > > then, the configuration will not be set to hardware.  
> > 
> > You're describing the behavior before the patch?
> > 
> > After the patch the command is ignored silently, like I said, right?
> > Because there is no handler added to nic_vf_cmd_msg_handler[].
> > Why is that okay? Or is there handler somewhere else?  
> 
> No need to add handlers to nic_vf_cmd_msg_handler[].
> It will run the path,
> if (i == ARRAY_SIZE(nic_vf_cmd_msg_handler))
> 	err = hinic_msg_to_mgmt(&pfhwdev->pf_to_mgmt, HINIC_MOD_L2NIC,
> 				cmd, buf_in, in_size, buf_out,
> 				out_size, HINIC_MGMT_MSG_SYNC);

Meaning it just forwards it to the firmware?

> right? or if not please show the related code.

I don't know, I don't know this random driver. I'm just asking you
questions because as the author of the patch _you_ are supposed to know.