On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 04:09:09PM -0800, Nelson, Shannon wrote:
> On 12/18/2023 11:27 AM, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> >
> >
> > From: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Commit 6624e780a577fc596788 ("ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller
> > functions") has refactored a bunch of code involved in PFR. In this
> > process, TC queue number adjustment for XDP was lost. Bring it back.
> >
> > Lack of such adjustment causes interface to go into no-carrier after a
> > reset, if XDP program is attached, with the following message:
> >
> > ice 0000:b1:00.0: Failed to set LAN Tx queue context, error: -22
> > ice 0000:b1:00.0 ens801f0np0: Failed to open VSI 0x0006 on switch 0x0001
> > ice 0000:b1:00.0: enable VSI failed, err -22, VSI index 0, type ICE_VSI_PF
> > ice 0000:b1:00.0: PF VSI rebuild failed: -22
> > ice 0000:b1:00.0: Rebuild failed, unload and reload driver
> >
> > Fixes: 6624e780a577 ("ice: split ice_vsi_setup into smaller functions")
> > Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Tested-by: Chandan Kumar Rout <chandanx.rout@xxxxxxxxx> (A Contingent Worker at Intel)
> > Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c
> > index de7ba87af45d..1bad6e17f9be 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c
> > @@ -2371,6 +2371,9 @@ static int ice_vsi_cfg_tc_lan(struct ice_pf *pf, struct ice_vsi *vsi)
> > } else {
> > max_txqs[i] = vsi->alloc_txq;
> > }
> > +
> > + if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_PF)
> > + max_txqs[i] += vsi->num_xdp_txq;
>
> Since this new code is coming right after an existing
> if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_CHNL)
> it looks like it would make sense to make it an 'else if' in that last
> block, e.g.:
>
> if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_CHNL) {
> if (!vsi->alloc_txq && vsi->num_txq)
> max_txqs[i] = vsi->num_txq;
> else
> max_txqs[i] = pf->num_lan_tx;
> } else if (vsi->type == ICE_VSI_PF) {
> max_txqs[i] += vsi->num_xdp_txq;
Would need to be
max_txqs[i] = vsi->alloc_txq + vsi->num_xdp_txq;
> } else {
> max_txqs[i] = vsi->alloc_txq;
> }
>
> Of course this begins to verge on the switch/case/default format.
>
> sln
>
I was going for logic: assign default values first, adjust based on enabled
features (well, a single feature) second. The thing that in my opinion would
make it more clear would be replacing 'vsi->type == ICE_VSI_PF' with
ice_is_xdp_ena_vsi(). Do you think this is worth doing?
>
> > }
> >
> > dev_dbg(dev, "vsi->tc_cfg.ena_tc = %d\n", vsi->tc_cfg.ena_tc);
> > --
> > 2.41.0
> >
> >
>
