On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:49:09AM -0500, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
> 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
> > +++ 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?
Is it OK without the prior patch in the series?
Jason
