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: <20230324231341.29808-6-saeed@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 24 Mar 2023 16:13:31 -0700
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
To:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Eli Cohen <elic@...dia.com>, Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>,
        Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Subject: [net-next V2 05/15] net/mlx5: Fix wrong comment

From: Eli Cohen <elic@...dia.com>

A control irq may be allocated from the parent device's pool in case
there is no SF dedicated pool. This could happen when there are not
enough vectors available for SFs.

Signed-off-by: Eli Cohen <elic@...dia.com>
Reviewed-by: Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/pci_irq.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/pci_irq.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/pci_irq.c
index 6bde18bcd42f..c72736f1571f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/pci_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/pci_irq.c
@@ -394,7 +394,9 @@ struct mlx5_irq *mlx5_ctrl_irq_request(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev)
 		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
 	cpumask_copy(req_mask, cpu_online_mask);
 	if (!mlx5_irq_pool_is_sf_pool(pool)) {
-		/* In case we are allocating a control IRQ for PF/VF */
+		/* In case we are allocating a control IRQ from a pci device's pool.
+		 * This can happen also for a SF if the SFs pool is empty.
+		 */
 		if (!pool->xa_num_irqs.max) {
 			cpumask_clear(req_mask);
 			/* In case we only have a single IRQ for PF/VF */
-- 
2.39.2

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ