On 6/18/2019 23:51, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 06:40:16AM +0000, Jianbo Liu wrote:
>> The 06/19/2019 13:04, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 04:44:26AM +0000, Jianbo Liu wrote:
>>>> The 06/18/2019 18:19, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 07:23:30PM +0000, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
>>>>>> From: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If vport metadata matching is enabled in eswitch, the rule created
>>>>>> must be changed to match on the metadata, instead of source port.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Roi Dayan <roid@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Mark Bloch <markb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c | 11 +++++++
>>>>>> drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.h | 16 ++++++++++
>>>>>> drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>>>> 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c
>>>>>> index 22e651cb5534..d4ed611de35d 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c
>>>>>> @@ -131,6 +131,17 @@ struct mlx5_eswitch_rep *mlx5_ib_vport_rep(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw, int vport)
>>>>>> return mlx5_eswitch_vport_rep(esw, vport);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +u32 mlx5_ib_eswitch_vport_match_metadata_enabled(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + return mlx5_eswitch_vport_match_metadata_enabled(esw);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +u32 mlx5_ib_eswitch_get_vport_metadata_for_match(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw,
>>>>>> + u16 vport)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + return mlx5_eswitch_get_vport_metadata_for_match(esw, vport);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. There is no need to introduce one line functions, call to that code directly.
>>>>
>>>> No. They are in IB, and we don't want them be mixed up by the original
>>>> functions in eswitch. Please ask Mark more about it.
>>>
>>> Please enlighten me.
>>
>> It was suggested by Mark in prevouis review.
>> I think it's because there are in different modules, and better to with
>> different names, so introduce there extra one line functions.
>> Please correct me if I'm wrong, Mark...
>
> mlx5_ib is full of direct function calls to mlx5_core and it is done on
> purpose for at least two reasons. First is to control in one place
> all compilation options and expose proper API interface with and without
> specific kernel config is on. Second is to emphasize that this is core
> function and save us time in refactoring and reviewing.
This was done in order to avoid #ifdef CONFIG_MLX5_ESWITCH,
I want to hide (as much as possible) the interactions with the eswitch level in ib_rep.c/ib_rep.h
so ib_rep.h will provide the stubs needed in case CONFIG_MLX5_ESWITCH isn't defined.
(Today include/linux/mlx5/eswitch.h) doesn't provide any stubs, mlx5_eswitch_get_encap_mode()
should have probably done the same.
As my long term goal is to break drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c (that file is already 7000 LOC)
I want to group together stuff in separate files.
If you prefer direct calls that's okay as well.
Mark
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 2. It should be bool and not u32.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> --
>>
>> --
