On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 02:53:26PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote: > From: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@xxxxxxx> > > There is a situation where num_tx_rings cannot be divided by bdr_int_num. > For example, num_tx_rings is 8 and bdr_int_num is 3. According to the > previous logic, this results in two tx_bdr corresponding memories not > being allocated, so when sending packets to tx ring 6 or 7, wild pointers > will be accessed. Of course, this issue doesn't exist on LS1028A, because > its num_tx_rings is 8, and bdr_int_num is either 1 or 2. However, there > is a risk for the upcoming i.MX95. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure > that each tx_bdr can be allocated to the corresponding memory. > > Signed-off-by: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@xxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@xxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@xxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@xxxxxxx> > --- > v5: no changes > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > index bd725561b8a2..bccbeb1f355c 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > @@ -3049,10 +3049,10 @@ static void enetc_int_vector_destroy(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv, int i) > int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) > { > struct pci_dev *pdev = priv->si->pdev; > + int v_tx_rings, v_remainder; > int num_stack_tx_queues; > int first_xdp_tx_ring; > int i, n, err, nvec; > - int v_tx_rings; > > nvec = ENETC_BDR_INT_BASE_IDX + priv->bdr_int_num; > /* allocate MSIX for both messaging and Rx/Tx interrupts */ > @@ -3066,9 +3066,12 @@ int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) > > /* # of tx rings per int vector */ > v_tx_rings = priv->num_tx_rings / priv->bdr_int_num; > + v_remainder = priv->num_tx_rings % priv->bdr_int_num; > > for (i = 0; i < priv->bdr_int_num; i++) { > - err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, v_tx_rings); > + int num_tx_rings = i < v_remainder ? v_tx_rings + 1 : v_tx_rings; It took me a moment to understand the mechanism through which this works, even though I read the intention in the commit message. Do you think this additional comment would help? /* Distribute the remaining TX rings to the first * v_tx_rings interrupt vectors */ > + > + err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, num_tx_rings); > if (err) > goto fail; > } > -- > 2.34.1 >