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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZG+SY1rfCaBsbp6K@nanopsycho> Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 18:52:51 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: Alejandro Lucero Palau <alucerop@....com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, 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 Thu, May 25, 2023 at 05:13:57PM CEST, alucerop@....com wrote: > >On 5/24/23 18:57, Alejandro Lucero Palau wrote: >> Hi Jiri, >> >> On 5/24/23 13:18, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> > >> > 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. >> >Apart from the change requested: Did you see the reply to your email? > >Reviewed-by: Alejandro Lucero<alucerop@....com> >Tested-by: Alejandro Lucero<alucerop@....com> > >> > 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 >> > >> > >>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists