[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47f8c95c-bac4-471f-8e58-9155c6e58cb5@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 09:45:18 +0100
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>, <horms@...nel.org>, "Aleksandr
Loktionov" <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
CC: <alok.a.tiwarilinux@...il.com>, <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
<andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] iavf: fix incorrect warning message in
iavf_del_vlans()
On 10/24/25 15:46, Alok Tiwari wrote:
> The warning message refers to "add VLAN changes" instead of
> "delete VLAN changes". Update the log string to use the correct text.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_virtchnl.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_virtchnl.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_virtchnl.c
> index 34a422a4a29c..6ad91db027d3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_virtchnl.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_virtchnl.c
> @@ -987,7 +987,7 @@ void iavf_del_vlans(struct iavf_adapter *adapter)
>
> len = virtchnl_struct_size(vvfl_v2, filters, count);
> if (len > IAVF_MAX_AQ_BUF_SIZE) {
> - dev_warn(&adapter->pdev->dev, "Too many add VLAN changes in one request\n");
> + dev_warn(&adapter->pdev->dev, "Too many delete VLAN changes in one request\n");
> while (len > IAVF_MAX_AQ_BUF_SIZE)
> len = virtchnl_struct_size(vvfl_v2, filters,
> --count);
As Simon said this is a clear copy-paste error.
But the message itself is not great:
there is too many VLAN DEL requests to fit into 4k of memory, so what?
driver will just split into multiple virtchnl messages (with the "loop"
for splitting is put multiple call layers above from iavf_del_vlans()),
and everything is expected to work fine (despite the fact that this is
likely not tested frequently ;))
I would suggest to also lover the log message level to info, and
rephrase as "Too many VLAN delete changes requested, splitting into
multiple messages to PF",
or similar. And the same for ADD requests, the same for v1 message
(so 4 cases total).
with that there will be no eyebrow raised for the dmesg reader
Powered by blists - more mailing lists