From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A724A0A02; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:03:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE88F40150; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:03:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com (szxga07-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.35]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5094014E for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 15:03:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from DGGEMS414-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by szxga07-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FV2254BpWzBsk9 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:01:01 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.103.128] (10.67.103.128) by DGGEMS414-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:03:24 +0800 To: Ferruh Yigit , References: <1619056552-43937-4-git-send-email-humin29@huawei.com> <1619525859-4182-1-git-send-email-humin29@huawei.com> From: "Min Hu (Connor)" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:03:24 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.103.128] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/hns3: fix parse link fails code fail X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 在 2021/4/27 20:45, Ferruh Yigit 写道: > On 4/27/2021 1:17 PM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: >> From: Chengwen Feng >> >> 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 >> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) >> --- >> 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. >