From: "Zhao1, Wei" <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
To: "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] net/i40e: fix FDIR check programming status error
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 03:21:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <A2573D2ACFCADC41BB3BE09C6DE313CA07E129F6@PGSMSX103.gar.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153259C90@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhang, Qi Z
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 11:16 AM
> To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/i40e: fix FDIR check programming status error
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Zhao1, Wei
> > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 11:12 AM
> > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/i40e: fix FDIR check programming status error
> >
> > This code change is ok also,
>
> I don't think so, with your change, it will always return 0 if DD bit is set, but
> we still need to return -1 if there is any error in descriptor, right?
Yes, you are right!
I will commit v2!!
I find a bug but give out an error fix patch, orz....
>
> but it seems need to add more Judging branch?
> > IF you think it is almost the same, I WILL commit a new v2.
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Zhang, Qi Z
> > > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 11:06 AM
> > > To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/i40e: fix FDIR check programming status
> > > error
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Zhao1, Wei
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 4:25 PM
> > > > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > > > Cc: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org; Zhao1,
> > > > Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
> > > > Subject: [PATCH] net/i40e: fix FDIR check programming status error
> > > >
> > > > In i40e FDIR PMD code for checking programming status function
> > > > i40e_check_fdir_programming_status(), the initial value of return
> > > > value ret should be set to -1 not 0, because if DD bit of
> > > > I40E_RX_DESC_STATUS_DD is not write back, this function will
> > > > return
> > > > 0 to upper function, this give an error info to upper function,
> > > > the fact for this is it is time out for DD write back and it should return -1.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 05999aab4ca6 ("i40e: add or delete flow director")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c | 3 ++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c
> > > > b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c index
> > > > d41601a..b958bf6 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c
> > > > @@ -1315,7 +1315,7 @@ i40e_check_fdir_programming_status(struct
> > > > i40e_rx_queue *rxq)
> > > > uint32_t rx_status;
> > > > uint32_t len, id;
> > > > uint32_t error;
> > > > - int ret = 0;
> > > > + int ret = -1;
> > > >
> > > > rxdp = &rxq->rx_ring[rxq->rx_tail];
> > > > qword1 = rte_le_to_cpu_64(rxdp->wb.qword1.status_error_len);
> > > > @@ -1360,6 +1360,7 @@ i40e_check_fdir_programming_status(struct
> > > > i40e_rx_queue *rxq)
> > > > I40E_PCI_REG_WRITE(rxq->qrx_tail, rxq- nb_rx_desc
> - 1);
> > > > else
> > > > I40E_PCI_REG_WRITE(rxq->qrx_tail, rxq->rx_tail - 1);
> > > > + ret = 0;
> > >
> > > Is it possible to overwrite previous ret = -1 which is not what we want?
> > >
> > > I would prefer
> > >
> > > int ret = 0;
> > >
> > > If (dd bit is set) {
> > > If xxx
> > > Ret = -1;
> > > If xxx
> > > Ret = -1;
> > > } else {
> > > ret = -1;
> > > }
> > >
> > > return ret;
> > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > return ret;
> > > > --
> > > > 2.7.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-13 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-11 8:25 Wei Zhao
2018-07-13 3:05 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2018-07-13 3:11 ` Zhao1, Wei
2018-07-13 3:15 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2018-07-13 3:21 ` Zhao1, Wei [this message]
2018-07-13 3:09 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] " Zhao Wei
2018-07-13 3:16 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3] " Zhao Wei
2018-07-13 3:51 ` Zhang, Qi Z
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=A2573D2ACFCADC41BB3BE09C6DE313CA07E129F6@PGSMSX103.gar.corp.intel.com \
--to=wei.zhao1@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).