On 4/27/2021 2:03 PM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
>
>
> 在 2021/4/27 20:45, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>> On 4/27/2021 1:17 PM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
>>> From: Chengwen Feng <fengcheng...@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> The link fails code should be parsed using the structure
>>> hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd, else it will parse fail.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 109e4dd1bd7a ("net/hns3: get link state change through mailbox")
>>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng <fengcheng...@huawei.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humi...@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>> v3:
>>> * get the parameter as 'struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd' at first place.
>>>
>>> v2:
>>> * kept original API interface.
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c | 11 +++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c b/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c
>>> index ba04ac9..31ab130 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/hns3/hns3_mbx.c
>>> @@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ hns3_link_fail_parse(struct hns3_hw *hw, uint8_t
>>> link_fail_code)
>>> static void
>>> hns3pf_handle_link_change_event(struct hns3_hw *hw,
>>> - struct hns3_mbx_pf_to_vf_cmd *req)
>>> + struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd *req)
>>> {
>>> #define LINK_STATUS_OFFSET 1
>>> #define LINK_FAIL_CODE_OFFSET 2
>>> @@ -513,7 +513,14 @@ hns3_dev_handle_mbx_msg(struct hns3_hw *hw)
>>> hns3_handle_asserting_reset(hw, req);
>>> break;
>>> case HNS3_MBX_PUSH_LINK_STATUS:
>>> - hns3pf_handle_link_change_event(hw, req);
>>> + /*
>>> + * This message is reported by the firmware and is
>>> + * reported in 'struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd' format.
>>> + * Therefore, we should cast the req variable to
>>> + * 'struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd' and then process it.
>>> + */
>>
>> I am asking just to double check, the 'msg' type is different of
>> 'hns3_mbx_pf_to_vf_cmd' & 'hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd', one is 'uint8_t', other is
>> 'uint16_t', and 'msg' is used in the function
>> 'hns3pf_handle_link_change_event()'.
>> Is the 'msg' usage still correct after this change?
>>
> Hi, it is correct.
> Currently, msg from PF or VF are all handled in the same
> handler（hns3_dev_handle_mbx_msg）, we do different handling
> according to different msg.
> In futrue, we will separate handler from PF and VF.
>
Let me clarify what I mean, 'msg' is accessed with an index like
"req->msg[LINK_FAIL_CODE_OFFSET]", and the 'req->msg' type is different as you
change the 'req' type. It changes 'uint8_t' -> 'uint16_t', which makes
"req->msg[LINK_FAIL_CODE_OFFSET]" point completely different location, can you
please confirm this is expected/correct?
>>> + hns3pf_handle_link_change_event(hw,
>>> + (struct hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd *)req);
>>
>> Will it be more readable if 'desc->data' cast to "struct
>> hns3_mbx_vf_to_pf_cmd
>> *" (instead of 'req')? Up to you, I can proceed with this one if you prefer.
>> .
> OK, thanks Ferruh.
So do you prefer to continue as it is, or will there be a change?
