netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] gve: Add RSS device option

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: <20240802161335.0e23e9ec@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:13:35 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Praveen Kaligineedi <pkaligineedi@...gle.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, willemb@...gle.com, jeroendb@...gle.com,
 shailend@...gle.com, hramamurthy@...gle.com, jfraker@...gle.com, Ziwei Xiao
 <ziweixiao@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] gve: Add RSS device option

On Thu,  1 Aug 2024 18:28:33 -0700 Praveen Kaligineedi wrote:
> @@ -45,7 +45,8 @@ void gve_parse_device_option(struct gve_priv *priv,
>  			     struct gve_device_option_dqo_qpl **dev_op_dqo_qpl,
>  			     struct gve_device_option_buffer_sizes **dev_op_buffer_sizes,
>  			     struct gve_device_option_flow_steering **dev_op_flow_steering,
> -			     struct gve_device_option_modify_ring **dev_op_modify_ring)
> +			     struct gve_device_option_modify_ring **dev_op_modify_ring,
> +			     struct gve_device_option_rss_config **dev_op_rss_config)
>  {
>  	u32 req_feat_mask = be32_to_cpu(option->required_features_mask);
>  	u16 option_length = be16_to_cpu(option->option_length);


> @@ -867,6 +887,8 @@ static void gve_enable_supported_features(struct gve_priv *priv,
>  					  *dev_op_buffer_sizes,
>  					  const struct gve_device_option_flow_steering
>  					  *dev_op_flow_steering,
> +					  const struct gve_device_option_rss_config
> +					  *dev_op_rss_config,
>  					  const struct gve_device_option_modify_ring
>  					  *dev_op_modify_ring)

Any reason these two functions order the arguments differently?