On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:47:10AM +0530, Selvin Xavier wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> +static u8 __rc_to_ib_wc_status(u8 qstatus)
> >> +{
> >> + switch (qstatus) {
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_OK:
> >> + return IB_WC_SUCCESS;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_ACCESS_ERROR:
> >> + return IB_WC_LOC_ACCESS_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_LENGTH_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_LOC_LEN_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_PROTECTION_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_LOC_PROT_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_LOCAL_QP_OPERATION_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_LOC_QP_OP_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_MEMORY_MGT_OPERATION_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_GENERAL_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_REMOTE_INVALID_REQUEST_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_REM_INV_REQ_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_WORK_REQUEST_FLUSHED_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR;
> >> + case CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_HW_FLUSH_ERR:
> >> + return IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR;
> >> + default:
> >> + return IB_WC_GENERAL_ERR;
> >> + }
> >> +}
> >> +
> >
> > Why don't you use these defines directly?
>
> CQ_RES* values are returned by the HW and these values are
> different from the corresponding IB_WC status values. say,
> CQ_RES_RC_STATUS_HW_FLUSH_ERR is 8 where as
> IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR is 5.
> So we thought it is better to map these values in a function rather
> than having a switch/case in the calling function.
>
> Let me know if you meant something different in your query.
Thanks,
This from_u8 -> to_u8 conversion confused me, because of our similar
function mlx5_handle_error_cqe() which updates wc->status at the same
time as it is called. So I expected to see something similar in your code
where you fill wc.
Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
