netdev - Re: [PATCH net] bnxt_en: eliminate the compile warning in bnxt_request_irq due to CONFIG_RFS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAL+tcoBu_jo5Nhv-4gRomwfOpN+Y_Ny+QJ6p1dk87gQ==YX-Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 09:07:48 +0800
From: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, michael.chan@...adcom.com, 
	pavan.chebbi@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bnxt_en: eliminate the compile warning in
 bnxt_request_irq due to CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL

On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 8:56 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 08:47:08 +0800 Jason Xing wrote:
> > >  static int bnxt_request_irq(struct bnxt *bp)
> > >  {
> > > +       struct cpu_rmap *rmap = NULL;
> > >         int i, j, rc = 0;
> > >         unsigned long flags = 0;
> > > -#ifdef CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL
> > > -       struct cpu_rmap *rmap;
> > > -#endif
> >
> > Sorry, Jakub. I failed to see the positive point of this kind of
> > change comparatively.
>
> Like Simon said -- fewer #ifdefs leads to fewer bugs of this nature.

Agree on this point.

> Or do you mean that you don't understand how my fix works?

I understand but my previous thought was not like this.

>
> > >         rc = bnxt_setup_int_mode(bp);
> > >         if (rc) {
> >
> > Probably in this position, you expect 'rmap = bp->dev->rx_cpu_rmap;'
> > to stay there even when CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL is off?
>
> no, dev->rx_cpu_rmap doesn't exist if RDS_ACCEL=n

I was trying to say 'readability' of rmap so I used 'stay' on purpose.
As to the core of the patch you provided, it works for sure.

I will send a v2 as you advised :)

Thanks,
Jason

>
> > The report says it's 'j' that causes the complaint.