[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<SJ0PR18MB52164E2721E056366EC30139DBBBA@SJ0PR18MB5216.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 09:54:00 +0000
From: Suman Ghosh <sumang@...vell.com>
To: Wojciech Drewek <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>,
Sunil Kovvuri Goutham
<sgoutham@...vell.com>,
Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@...vell.com>,
Subbaraya
Sundeep Bhatta <sbhatta@...vell.com>,
Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>,
Linu Cherian <lcherian@...vell.com>,
Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
<jerinj@...vell.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"kuba@...nel.org"
<kuba@...nel.org>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [net PATCH] octeontx2-pf: Fix ntuple rule creation to
direct packet to VF with higher Rx queue than its PF
>> Signed-off-by: Suman Ghosh <sumang@...vell.com>
>> ---
>> .../marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c | 21
>+++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c
>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c
>> index 4762dbea64a1..4200f2d387f6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c
>> @@ -1088,6 +1088,7 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct
>ethtool_rxnfc *nfc)
>> struct ethhdr *eth_hdr;
>> bool new = false;
>> int err = 0;
>> + u64 vf_num;
>> u32 ring;
>>
>> if (!flow_cfg->max_flows) {
>> @@ -1100,9 +1101,26 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct
>ethtool_rxnfc *nfc)
>> if (!(pfvf->flags & OTX2_FLAG_NTUPLE_SUPPORT))
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> + /* Number of queues on a VF can be greater or less than
>> + * the PF's queue. Hence no need to check for the
>> + * queue count. Hence no need to check queue count if PF
>> + * is installing for its VF. Below is the expected vf_num value
>> + * based on the ethtool commands.
>> + *
>> + * e.g.
>> + * 1. ethtool -U <netdev> ... action -1 ==> vf_num:255
>> + * 2. ethtool -U <netdev> ... action <queue_num> ==> vf_num:0
>> + * 3. ethtool -U <netdev> ... vf <vf_idx> queue <queue_num> ==>
>> + * vf_num:vf_idx+1
>> + */
>> + vf_num = ethtool_get_flow_spec_ring_vf(fsp->ring_cookie);
>> + if (!is_otx2_vf(pfvf->pcifunc) && vf_num)
>> + goto bypass_queue_check;
>
>Let's just add this condition to the next if, no need for goto.
[Suman] I kept it a separate check to make the code more readable. Otherwise the next if condition will be complicated.
>
>> +
>> if (ring >= pfvf->hw.rx_queues && fsp->ring_cookie !=
>RX_CLS_FLOW_DISC)
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> +bypass_queue_check:
>> if (fsp->location >= otx2_get_maxflows(flow_cfg))
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> @@ -1182,6 +1200,9 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct
>ethtool_rxnfc *nfc)
>> flow_cfg->nr_flows++;
>> }
>>
>> + if (flow->is_vf)
>> + netdev_info(pfvf->netdev,
>> + "Make sure that VF's queue number is within its queue
>> +limit\n");
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists