netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] sfc: add devlink support for ef100

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

Message-ID: <a11cdd6f-fb67-3517-31aa-88e64d607778@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2023 06:13:29 +0000
From:   Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     "Lucero Palau, Alejandro" <alejandro.lucero-palau@....com>,
        Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-net-drivers (AMD-Xilinx)" <linux-net-drivers@....com>
Cc:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "habetsm@...il.com" <habetsm@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] sfc: add devlink support for ef100

On 20/01/2023 14:11, Lucero Palau, Alejandro wrote:
> 
> On 1/19/23 23:40, Jacob Keller wrote:
>>
>> On 1/19/2023 3:31 AM, alejandro.lucero-palau@....com wrote:
>>> @@ -1124,6 +1125,10 @@ int ef100_probe_netdev_pf(struct efx_nic *efx)
>>>   		netif_warn(efx, probe, net_dev,
>>>   			   "Failed to probe base mport rc %d; representors will not function\n",
>>>   			   rc);
>>> +	} else {
>>> +		if (efx_probe_devlink(efx))
>>> +			netif_warn(efx, probe, net_dev,
>>> +				   "Failed to register devlink\n");
>>>   	}
>>>   
>> A bit of a weird construction here with the next step in an else block?
>> I guess this is being treated as an optional feature, and depends on
>> efx_ef100_get_base_mport succeeding?
> 
> Right. The mae ports initialization can fail but the driver can still 
> initialize the device with limited functionality.

But in that case, we probably should support e.g. devlink info, even
 though without the MAE ports we can't support devlink port.