[dpdk-dev,18/39] net/ixgbe/base: fix check on NACK

  Previously we checked only msgbuf[0] for
(IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN |  IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK), but this would not
work if index != 0 and as a result NACK will not be detected.

Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")

Signed-off-by: Xiao Wang <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>
---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c | 18 ++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
  

On 8/27/2016 4:48 PM, Xiao Wang wrote:
> Previously we checked only msgbuf[0] for

"return buffer" instead of msgbuf[0] ?

> (IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN |  IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK), but this would not
> work if index != 0 and as a result NACK will not be detected.

"write buffer is not 0" instead of "index != 0"

> 

Function also starts using ixgbevf_write_msg_read_ack() instead of
separate write and read, is it possible to fix NACK only in this patch,
and do ixgbevf_write_msg_read_ack() switch in patch 27/39.
If prefer to keep in this patch, please mention about this switch in
comment log.

> Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Wang <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c | 18 ++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> index c0fedea..f60ff7d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> @@ -529,8 +529,7 @@ s32 ixgbe_get_mac_addr_vf(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, u8 *mac_addr)
>  
>  s32 ixgbevf_set_uc_addr_vf(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, u32 index, u8 *addr)
>  {
> -	struct ixgbe_mbx_info *mbx = &hw->mbx;
> -	u32 msgbuf[3];
> +	u32 msgbuf[3], msgbuf_chk;
>  	u8 *msg_addr = (u8 *)(&msgbuf[1]);
>  	s32 ret_val;
>  
> @@ -543,18 +542,17 @@ s32 ixgbevf_set_uc_addr_vf(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, u32 index, u8 *addr)
>  	 */
>  	msgbuf[0] |= index << IXGBE_VT_MSGINFO_SHIFT;
>  	msgbuf[0] |= IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN;
> +	msgbuf_chk = msgbuf[0];
>  	if (addr)
>  		memcpy(msg_addr, addr, 6);
> -	ret_val = mbx->ops.write_posted(hw, msgbuf, 3, 0);
>  
> -	if (!ret_val)
> -		ret_val = mbx->ops.read_posted(hw, msgbuf, 3, 0);
> +	ret_val = ixgbevf_write_msg_read_ack(hw, msgbuf, msgbuf, 3);
> +	if (!ret_val) {
> +		msgbuf[0] &= ~IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_CTS;
>  
> -	msgbuf[0] &= ~IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_CTS;
> -
> -	if (!ret_val)
> -		if (msgbuf[0] == (IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN | IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK))
> -			ret_val = IXGBE_ERR_OUT_OF_MEM;
> +		if (msgbuf[0] == (msgbuf_chk | IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK))
> +			return IXGBE_ERR_OUT_OF_MEM;

What about following instead of introducing msgbuf_chk:

if ((msgbuf[0] & IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN) &&
	    (msgbuf[0] & IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK))

Please check patch 15/39

> +	}
>  
>  	return ret_val;
>  }
>
  

Hi Ferruh,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yigit, Ferruh
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 1:07 AM
> To: Wang, Xiao W <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo
> <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 18/39] net/ixgbe/base: fix check on NACK
> 
> On 8/27/2016 4:48 PM, Xiao Wang wrote:
> > Previously we checked only msgbuf[0] for
> 
> "return buffer" instead of msgbuf[0] ?
> 

Looks better. Use it in v2.

> > (IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN |  IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK), but this would not
> > work if index != 0 and as a result NACK will not be detected.
> 
> "write buffer is not 0" instead of "index != 0"
> 

    msgbuf[0] |= index << IXGBE_VT_MSGINFO_SHIFT;
    msgbuf[0] |= IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN;

"index != 0" has effect on the msgbuf[0], so we should emphasize on "index".
I will change it to "index is not 0" in v2.

> >
> 
> Function also starts using ixgbevf_write_msg_read_ack() instead of
> separate write and read, is it possible to fix NACK only in this patch,
> and do ixgbevf_write_msg_read_ack() switch in patch 27/39.
> If prefer to keep in this patch, please mention about this switch in
> comment log.
> 

Agree. Thanks.

> > Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiao Wang <xiao.w.wang@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c | 18 ++++++++----------
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> > index c0fedea..f60ff7d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/base/ixgbe_vf.c
> > @@ -529,8 +529,7 @@ s32 ixgbe_get_mac_addr_vf(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, u8
> *mac_addr)
> >
> >  s32 ixgbevf_set_uc_addr_vf(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, u32 index, u8 *addr)
> >  {
> > -	struct ixgbe_mbx_info *mbx = &hw->mbx;
> > -	u32 msgbuf[3];
> > +	u32 msgbuf[3], msgbuf_chk;
> >  	u8 *msg_addr = (u8 *)(&msgbuf[1]);
> >  	s32 ret_val;
> >
> > @@ -543,18 +542,17 @@ s32 ixgbevf_set_uc_addr_vf(struct ixgbe_hw *hw,
> u32 index, u8 *addr)
> >  	 */
> >  	msgbuf[0] |= index << IXGBE_VT_MSGINFO_SHIFT;
> >  	msgbuf[0] |= IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN;
> > +	msgbuf_chk = msgbuf[0];
> >  	if (addr)
> >  		memcpy(msg_addr, addr, 6);
> > -	ret_val = mbx->ops.write_posted(hw, msgbuf, 3, 0);
> >
> > -	if (!ret_val)
> > -		ret_val = mbx->ops.read_posted(hw, msgbuf, 3, 0);
> > +	ret_val = ixgbevf_write_msg_read_ack(hw, msgbuf, msgbuf, 3);
> > +	if (!ret_val) {
> > +		msgbuf[0] &= ~IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_CTS;
> >
> > -	msgbuf[0] &= ~IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_CTS;
> > -
> > -	if (!ret_val)
> > -		if (msgbuf[0] == (IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN |
> IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK))
> > -			ret_val = IXGBE_ERR_OUT_OF_MEM;
> > +		if (msgbuf[0] == (msgbuf_chk | IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK))
> > +			return IXGBE_ERR_OUT_OF_MEM;
> 
> What about following instead of introducing msgbuf_chk:
> 
> if ((msgbuf[0] & IXGBE_VF_SET_MACVLAN) &&
> 	    (msgbuf[0] & IXGBE_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK))
> 
> Please check patch 15/39

It's different from 15/39 where the write buffer is simple,
Here the write buffer msgbuf[0] is more complicated, if we don't
introduce msgbuf_chk, the code will looks bloated. 

> 
> > +	}
> >
> >  	return ret_val;
> >  }
> >
> 
>