[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] drivers/net/i40e/:remove i40e_nvmupd_command redundant code

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] drivers/net/i40e/:remove i40e_nvmupd_command redundant code

[Li Han]

in function i40e_nvmupd_validate_command, when "cmd->data_size < 1"
it'll return I40E_NVMUPD_INVALID,and in function "i40e_nvmupd_command"
when "upd_cmd == I40E_NVMUPD_STATUS",it check "!cmd->data_size" again,
but it's no need.

Signed-off-by: Li Han <han.li1@zte.com.cn>
---
 drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c | 5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c b/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
index c77dac0..5de22e4 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
@@ -869,11 +869,6 @@ enum i40e_status_code i40e_nvmupd_command(struct i40e_hw *hw,
 	 * going into the state machine
 	 */
 	if (upd_cmd == I40E_NVMUPD_STATUS) {
-		if (!cmd->data_size) {
-			*perrno = -EFAULT;
-			return I40E_ERR_BUF_TOO_SHORT;
-		}
-
 		bytes[0] = hw->nvmupd_state;
 
 		if (cmd->data_size >= 4) {
-- 
1.8.3.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] drivers/net/i40e/:remove i40e_nvmupd_command redundant code

[Zhang, Qi Z]

Hi Han:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Li Han [mailto:han.li1@zte.com.cn]
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 3:27 PM
> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Li Han <han.li1@zte.com.cn>
> Subject: [PATCH] [dpdk-dev] drivers/net/i40e/:remove
> i40e_nvmupd_command redundant code
> 
> in function i40e_nvmupd_validate_command, when "cmd->data_size < 1"
> it'll return I40E_NVMUPD_INVALID,and in function "i40e_nvmupd_command"
> when "upd_cmd == I40E_NVMUPD_STATUS",it check "!cmd->data_size" again,
> but it's no need.

Thanks for contribute this.
I have no objection for this change.

But you know , base code is kind of special code in driver, it is shared by different platform,
Intel DPDk team will update base code timely based on Intel's base code team's release.
So we are not prefer to make much difference from the original version which make things complex for code update.
So usually we will only accept necessary patch (like critical fix, missing device configure... which may impact our customer)

Since this is the patch for code clean, I think it's better we just feedback to our base code team , and hope this could be captured in next update.
Is that ok for you?
Thanks for your understanding

Regards
Qi
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Han <han.li1@zte.com.cn>
> ---
>  drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c | 5 -----
>  1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
> b/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
> index c77dac0..5de22e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/base/i40e_nvm.c
> @@ -869,11 +869,6 @@ enum i40e_status_code
> i40e_nvmupd_command(struct i40e_hw *hw,
>  	 * going into the state machine
>  	 */
>  	if (upd_cmd == I40E_NVMUPD_STATUS) {
> -		if (!cmd->data_size) {
> -			*perrno = -EFAULT;
> -			return I40E_ERR_BUF_TOO_SHORT;
> -		}
> -
>  		bytes[0] = hw->nvmupd_state;
> 
>  		if (cmd->data_size >= 4) {
> --
> 1.8.3.1