Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/hns3: fix parse link fails code fail

["Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>]

在 2021/4/27 21:19, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
> On 4/27/2021 2:03 PM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2021/4/27 20:45, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>>> On 4/27/2021 1:17 PM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
>>>> From: Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen@huawei.com>
>>>>
>>>> The link fails code should be parsed using the structure
>>>> hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd, else it will parse fail.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 109e4dd1bd7a ("net/hns3: get link state change through mailbox")
>>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen@huawei.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v3:
>>>> * get the parameter as 'struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd' at first place.
>>>>
>>>> v2:
>>>> * kept original API interface.
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c | 11 +++++++++--
>>>>    1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c b/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c
>>>> index ba04ac9..31ab130 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c
>>>> @@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ hns3_link_fail_parse(struct hns3_hw *hw, uint8_t
>>>> link_fail_code)
>>>>      static void
>>>>    hns3pf_handle_link_change_event(struct hns3_hw *hw,
>>>> -                  struct hns3_mbx_pf_to_vf_cmd *req)
>>>> +                struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd *req)
>>>>    {
>>>>    #define LINK_STATUS_OFFSET     1
>>>>    #define LINK_FAIL_CODE_OFFSET  2
>>>> @@ -513,7 +513,14 @@ hns3_dev_handle_mbx_msg(struct hns3_hw *hw)
>>>>                hns3_handle_asserting_reset(hw, req);
>>>>                break;
>>>>            case HNS3_MBX_PUSH_LINK_STATUS:
>>>> -            hns3pf_handle_link_change_event(hw, req);
>>>> +            /*
>>>> +             * This message is reported by the firmware and is
>>>> +             * reported in 'struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd' format.
>>>> +             * Therefore, we should cast the req variable to
>>>> +             * 'struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd' and then process it.
>>>> +             */
>>>
>>> I am asking just to double check, the 'msg' type is different of
>>> 'hns3_mbx_pf_to_vf_cmd' & 'hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd', one is 'uint8_t', other is
>>> 'uint16_t', and 'msg' is used in the function
>>> 'hns3pf_handle_link_change_event()'.
>>> Is the 'msg' usage still correct after this change?
>>>
>> Hi, it is correct.
>> Currently, msg from PF or VF are all handled in the same
>> handler（hns3_dev_handle_mbx_msg）, we do different handling
>> according to different msg.
>> In futrue, we will separate handler from PF and VF.
>>
> 
> Let me clarify what I mean, 'msg' is accessed with an index like
> "req->msg[LINK_FAIL_CODE_OFFSET]", and the 'req->msg' type is different as you
> change the 'req' type. It changes 'uint8_t' -> 'uint16_t', which makes
> "req->msg[LINK_FAIL_CODE_OFFSET]" point completely different location, can you
> please confirm this is expected/correct?
> 
Hi, it is corect, we have tested it.
> 
>>>> +            hns3pf_handle_link_change_event(hw,
>>>> +                (struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd *)req);
>>>
>>> Will it be more readable if 'desc->data' cast to "struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd
>>> *" (instead of 'req')? Up to you, I can proceed with this one if you prefer.
>>> .
>> OK, thanks Ferruh.
> 
> So do you prefer to continue as it is, or will there be a change?
> 
continue as it is, thanks.
> .
>