On 2/8/22 2:25 PM, mike.marciniszyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The AIP code signals the phys_mtu in the following query_port()
> fragment:
>
> props->phys_mtu = HFI1_CAP_IS_KSET(AIP) ? hfi1_max_mtu :
> ib_mtu_enum_to_int(props->max_mtu);
>
> Using the largest MTU possible should not depend on AIP.
>
> Fix by unconditionally using the hfi1_max_mtu value.
>
> Reviewed-by: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c
> index dc9211f..99d0743 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c
> @@ -1397,8 +1397,7 @@ static int query_port(struct rvt_dev_info *rdi, u32 port_num,
> 4096 : hfi1_max_mtu), IB_MTU_4096);
> props->active_mtu = !valid_ib_mtu(ppd->ibmtu) ? props->max_mtu :
> mtu_to_enum(ppd->ibmtu, IB_MTU_4096);
> - props->phys_mtu = HFI1_CAP_IS_KSET(AIP) ? hfi1_max_mtu :
> - ib_mtu_enum_to_int(props->max_mtu);
> + props->phys_mtu = hfi1_max_mtu;
>
> return 0;
> }
Fixes: 6d72344cf6c4 ("IB/ipoib: Increase ipoib Datagram mode MTU's upper limit")
Can this just get queued up for-next or should I resubmit with the fixes line above?
-Denny
