netdev - Re: [patch net-next 08/15] sfc: register devlink port with ops

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <24213696-eb18-90ad-8e96-1c26bc1136aa@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 18:57:50 +0100
From: Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, leon@...nel.org, saeedm@...dia.com, moshe@...dia.com,
 jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, tariqt@...dia.com,
 idosch@...dia.com, petrm@...dia.com, simon.horman@...igine.com,
 ecree.xilinx@...il.com, habetsm.xilinx@...il.com,
 michal.wilczynski@...el.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 08/15] sfc: register devlink port with ops

Hi Jiri,

On 5/24/23 13:18, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> CAUTION: This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
>
>
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
>
> Use newly introduce devlink port registration function variant and
> register devlink port passing ops.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
> ---
>   drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/efx_devlink.c | 8 +++++++-
>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/efx_devlink.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/efx_devlink.c
> index 381b805659d3..f93437757ba3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/efx_devlink.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/efx_devlink.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,10 @@ struct efx_devlink {
>   };
>
>   #ifdef CONFIG_SFC_SRIOV
> +
> +static const struct devlink_port_ops sfc_devlink_port_ops = {
> +};
> +

We can have devlink port without SRIOV, so we need this outside the 
previous ifdef.

Apart from that, it looks OK. I'll test it and report back.

>   static void efx_devlink_del_port(struct devlink_port *dl_port)
>   {
>          if (!dl_port)
> @@ -57,7 +61,9 @@ static int efx_devlink_add_port(struct efx_nic *efx,
>
>          mport->dl_port.index = mport->mport_id;
>
> -       return devl_port_register(efx->devlink, &mport->dl_port, mport->mport_id);
> +       return devl_port_register_with_ops(efx->devlink, &mport->dl_port,
> +                                          mport->mport_id,
> +                                          &sfc_devlink_port_ops);
>   }
>
>   static int efx_devlink_port_addr_get(struct devlink_port *port, u8 *hw_addr,
> --
> 2.39.2
>
>