From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C3BD42931;
Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:50:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D841E42B7E;
Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:50:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35F52410F9;
Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:50:14 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;
d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel;
t=1681379414; x=1712915414;
h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:
references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=VQXRouaK+IKPG/RNj7a4FchRTe4L3XqOPsszmvYTy6E=;
b=DrKBIJ1hT96lYNtLi0/+X9cL4r5QZz2j151PgEXJrZGspKlBE9FlkraI
+NrV0TIREc42SQd1edg+nOdBpNcP4v5R15353OqpGM6+dyVAXpwuoPyD7
quIt8i9EWLoPuzR5uBPEHwsbolKD1S4f4/vQ3RA9f/eV3GR551+yilE+N
kWl5mab9RpPpJWKh3/qGtQzehRdTfA/ro4Y4XdDC7MyxohxyElkgZjVi/
IFcd+hLGsN505+lTblOVCkHyqqrm/P84Xfom6mOPT9S0oNV3FaGh3hBBV
1/Whga1YhzgRpkou1CV+ualn6ATehNkIHD+Wd1cmHANHp01k/TJFzrtvK Q==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10678"; a="409290359"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.98,341,1673942400"; d="scan'208";a="409290359"
Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29])
by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
13 Apr 2023 02:50:12 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10678"; a="778699245"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.98,341,1673942400"; d="scan'208";a="778699245"
Received: from dpdk-wenjing-01.sh.intel.com ([10.67.119.244])
by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Apr 2023 02:50:10 -0700
From: Wenjing Qiao <wenjing.qiao@intel.com>
To: jingjing.wu@intel.com,
beilei.xing@intel.com,
qi.z.zhang@intel.com
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Wenjing Qiao <wenjing.qiao@intel.com>, stable@dpdk.org,
Charles Stoll <charles.stoll@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 02/18] common/idpf: fix ctlq message send and receive
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2023 05:44:46 -0400
Message-Id: <20230413094502.1714755-3-wenjing.qiao@intel.com>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1
In-Reply-To: <20230413094502.1714755-1-wenjing.qiao@intel.com>
References: <20230413094502.1714755-1-wenjing.qiao@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Fixes the ctlq send and receive functions to not cast the cookie field
to a u64 before programming. By doing a cast, it can cause endianness
issues as LE will swap the lower 32 and higher 32 bits whereas BE will
not. By treating this field as two 32 bit values, both BE and LE will
place the retval and opcode in the correct location.
Since this field is now being treated as two 32 bit values, the cfg.data
section must also be split into a data high and data low. Macros to
easily pack and read these fields have also been added.
Fixes: fb4ac04e9bfa ("common/idpf: introduce common library")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Charles Stoll <charles.stoll@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenjing Qiao <wenjing.qiao@intel.com>
---
drivers/common/idpf/base/idpf_controlq.c | 16 ++++------------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/common/idpf/base/idpf_controlq.c b/drivers/common/idpf/base/idpf_controlq.c
index 3af81e5a64..8e4d3ee54f 100644
--- a/drivers/common/idpf/base/idpf_controlq.c
+++ b/drivers/common/idpf/base/idpf_controlq.c
@@ -311,18 +311,14 @@ int idpf_ctlq_send(struct idpf_hw *hw, struct idpf_ctlq_info *cq,
for (i = 0; i < num_q_msg; i++) {
struct idpf_ctlq_msg *msg = &q_msg[i];
- u64 msg_cookie;
desc = IDPF_CTLQ_DESC(cq, cq->next_to_use);
desc->opcode = CPU_TO_LE16(msg->opcode);
desc->pfid_vfid = CPU_TO_LE16(msg->func_id);
- msg_cookie = *(u64 *)&msg->cookie;
- desc->cookie_high =
- CPU_TO_LE32(IDPF_HI_DWORD(msg_cookie));
- desc->cookie_low =
- CPU_TO_LE32(IDPF_LO_DWORD(msg_cookie));
+ desc->cookie_high = CPU_TO_LE32(msg->cookie.mbx.chnl_opcode);
+ desc->cookie_low = CPU_TO_LE32(msg->cookie.mbx.chnl_retval);
desc->flags = CPU_TO_LE16((msg->host_id & IDPF_HOST_ID_MASK) <<
IDPF_CTLQ_FLAG_HOST_ID_S);
@@ -620,8 +616,6 @@ int idpf_ctlq_recv(struct idpf_ctlq_info *cq, u16 *num_q_msg,
num_to_clean = *num_q_msg;
for (i = 0; i < num_to_clean; i++) {
- u64 msg_cookie;
-
/* Fetch next descriptor and check if marked as done */
desc = IDPF_CTLQ_DESC(cq, ntc);
flags = LE16_TO_CPU(desc->flags);
@@ -639,10 +633,8 @@ int idpf_ctlq_recv(struct idpf_ctlq_info *cq, u16 *num_q_msg,
if (flags & IDPF_CTLQ_FLAG_ERR)
ret_code = -EBADMSG;
- msg_cookie = (u64)LE32_TO_CPU(desc->cookie_high) << 32;
- msg_cookie |= (u64)LE32_TO_CPU(desc->cookie_low);
- idpf_memcpy(&q_msg[i].cookie, &msg_cookie, sizeof(u64),
- IDPF_NONDMA_TO_NONDMA);
+ q_msg[i].cookie.mbx.chnl_opcode = LE32_TO_CPU(desc->cookie_high);
+ q_msg[i].cookie.mbx.chnl_retval = LE32_TO_CPU(desc->cookie_low);
q_msg[i].opcode = LE16_TO_CPU(desc->opcode);
q_msg[i].data_len = LE16_TO_CPU(desc->datalen);
--
2.25.1