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

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

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.

>> +			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.
>