netdev - Re: [PATCH] octeontx2-af: Send Link events one by one

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: <20250513131721.GY3339421@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 14:17:21 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Subbaraya Sundeep <sbhatta@...vell.com>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, gakula@...vell.com,
	hkelam@...vell.com, sgoutham@...vell.com, lcherian@...vell.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] octeontx2-af: Send Link events one by one

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 01:02:35PM +0000, Subbaraya Sundeep wrote:
> Hi again,
> 
> On 2025-05-12 at 11:45:43, Subbaraya Sundeep (sbhatta@...vell.com) wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> > 
> > On 2025-05-12 at 10:09:54, Simon Horman (horms@...nel.org) wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 10:46:23PM +0530, Subbaraya Sundeep wrote:
> > > > Send link events one after another otherwise new message
> > > > is overwriting the message which is being processed by PF.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: a88e0f936ba9 ("octeontx2: Detect the mbox up or down message via register")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Subbaraya Sundeep <sbhatta@...vell.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_cgx.c | 2 ++
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_cgx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_cgx.c
> > > > index 992fa0b..ebb56eb 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_cgx.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_cgx.c
> > > > @@ -272,6 +272,8 @@ static void cgx_notify_pfs(struct cgx_link_event *event, struct rvu *rvu)
> > > >  
> > > >  		otx2_mbox_msg_send_up(&rvu->afpf_wq_info.mbox_up, pfid);
> > > 
> > > Hi Subbaraya,
> > > 
> > > Are there other callers of otx2_mbox_msg_send_up()
> > > which also need this logic? If so, perhaps a helper is useful.
> > > If not, could you clarify why?
> > > 
> > UP messages are async notifications where we just send and forget.
> > There are other callers as I said we just send and forget everywhere
> > in the driver. Only this callsite has been modified because we have
> > seen an issue on customer setup where bunch of link events are queued
> > for a same device at one point of time.

Thanks for the clarification.

> > > >  
> > > > +		otx2_mbox_wait_for_rsp(&rvu->afpf_wq_info.mbox_up, pfid);
> > > 
> > > This can return an error. Which is checked in otx2_sync_mbox_up_msg().
> > > Does it make sense to do so here too?
> > > 
> > Yes it makes sense to use otx2_sync_mbox_up_msg here. I will use it
> > here.
> > 
> I will leave it as otx2_mbox_wait_for_rsp. Since otx2_sync_mbox_up_msg
> is in nic driver and we do not include nic files in AF driver. Since
> this is a void function will print an error if otx2_mbox_wait_for_rsp
> returns error.

Sorry, I wasn't clear in my previous email.

I was asking if it makes sense to check the return value of
otx2_mbox_wait_for_rsp() in this patch.

...