netdev - Re: [PATCH net 3/3] ice: Fix PF with enabled XDP going no-carrier after reset

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: <e24ad563-f814-490f-8659-af6ff15cdbc0@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 09:04:23 -0800
From: "Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@....com>
To: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
 kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com,
 magnus.karlsson@...el.com, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
 hawk@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Chandan Kumar Rout <chandanx.rout@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 3/3] ice: Fix PF with enabled XDP going no-carrier
 after reset

On 12/20/2023 1:23 AM, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 04:09:09PM -0800, Nelson, Shannon wrote:
>> On 12/18/2023 11:27 AM, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>>> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
>>>
>>> Commit 6624e780a577fc596788 ("ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller
>>> functions") has refactored a bunch of code involved in PFR. In this
>>> process, TC queue number adjustment for XDP was lost. Bring it back.
>>>
>>> Lack of such adjustment causes interface to go into no-carrier after a
>>> reset, if XDP program is attached, with the following message:
>>>
>>> ice 0000:b1:00.0: Failed to set LAN Tx queue context, error: -22
>>> ice 0000:b1:00.0 ens801f0np0: Failed to open VSI 0x0006 on switch 0x0001
>>> ice 0000:b1:00.0: enable VSI failed, err -22, VSI index 0, type ICE_VSI_PF
>>> ice 0000:b1:00.0: PF VSI rebuild failed: -22
>>> ice 0000:b1:00.0: Rebuild failed, unload and reload driver
>>>
>>> Fixes: 6624e780a577 ("ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller functions")
>>> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
>>> Tested-by: Chandan Kumar Rout <chandanx.rout@...el.com> (A Contingent Worker at Intel)
>>> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c | 3 +++
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c
>>> index de7ba87af45d..1bad6e17f9be 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c
>>> @@ -2371,6 +2371,9 @@ static int ice_vsi_cfg_tc_lan(struct ice_pf *pf, struct ice_vsi *vsi)
>>>                   } else {
>>>                           max_txqs[i] = vsi->alloc_txq;
>>>                   }
>>> +
>>> +               if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_PF)
>>> +                       max_txqs[i] += vsi->num_xdp_txq;
>>
>> Since this new code is coming right after an existing
>>                if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_CHNL)
>> it looks like it would make sense to make it an 'else if' in that last
>> block, e.g.:
>>
>>                if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_CHNL) {
>>                        if (!vsi->alloc_txq && vsi->num_txq)
>>                                max_txqs[i] = vsi->num_txq;
>>                        else
>>                                max_txqs[i] = pf->num_lan_tx;
>>                } else if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_PF) {
>>                        max_txqs[i] += vsi->num_xdp_txq;
> 
> Would need to be
>          max_txqs[i] = vsi->alloc_txq + vsi->num_xdp_txq;
> 
>>                } else {
>>                        max_txqs[i] = vsi->alloc_txq;
>>                }
>>
>> Of course this begins to verge on the switch/case/default format.
>>
>> sln
>>
> 
> I was going for logic: assign default values first, adjust based on enabled
> features (well, a single feature) second. The thing that in my opinion would
> make it more clear would be replacing 'vsi->type == ICE_VSI_PF' with
> ice_is_xdp_ena_vsi(). Do you think this is worth doing?

Hmm... I made a dumb error in a quick read of the code.  This suggests 
that making the intent of the code more clear would be a good idea.  I 
think that the ice_is_xdp_ena_vsi() would definitely make it more clear 
as opposed to the bare ICE_VCSI_PF.

sln


> 
>>
>>>           }
>>>
>>>           dev_dbg(dev, "vsi->tc_cfg.ena_tc = %d\n", vsi->tc_cfg.ena_tc);
>>> --
>>> 2.41.0
>>>
>>>
>>