RE: [PATCH] net/txgbe: fix the missing old mailbox interface calls

["Jiawen Wu" <jiawenwu@trustnetic.com>]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 2:25 PM, Jiawen Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 1:48 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:56:24 +0800
> > Jiawen Wu <jiawenwu@trustnetic.com> wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -28,6 +29,9 @@ void txgbe_init_ops_aml40(struct txgbe_hw *hw)
> > >  	mac->init_mac_link_ops = txgbe_init_mac_link_ops_aml40;
> > >  	mac->get_link_capabilities = txgbe_get_link_capabilities_aml40;
> > >  	mac->check_link = txgbe_check_mac_link_aml40;
> > > +
> > > +	/* MAILBOX */
> > > +	mbx->host_interface_command = txgbe_host_interface_command_aml;
> > >  }
> >
> > Maybe that comment means something to you, but it seems like something
> > the next maintainer would not know what it means. Could you explain it more?
> 
> For different devices, the mailbox flow between software and firmware is
> different. There are several mailbox command in the txgbe driver, but only
> txgbe_hic_sr_read() was changed to use the new flow in commit
> 6a139ade82e7 ("net/txgbe: add new SW-FW mailbox interface"). Because
> this function invoke the txgbe_hic_unlocked() directly without SW-FW
> semaphore, I guess.
> 
> It lead to other mailbox commands timeout for Amber-Lite devices, which
> is required to use the new flow. So this patch fills in the missing part.
> 
> For the sake of code tidy, txgbe_hic_sr_read() should change to use the
> locked function txgbe_host_interface_command(), and this function could
> be change to pointer in struct txgbe_mbx_info for different devices.

Hi Stephen Hemminger,

Does this explanation is sufficient? Should I send v2 patch with these logs?