On 6/29/2017 3:51 AM, Ajit Khaparde wrote: > Set the MTU of the device to MAX size possible.
What was the failure with existing code? > Signed-off-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khapa...@broadcom.com> Can you please add the Fixes tag. > --- > drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_hwrm.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_hwrm.c b/drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_hwrm.c > index e237041..580b2d8 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_hwrm.c > +++ b/drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_hwrm.c > @@ -2023,8 +2023,7 @@ static int bnxt_hwrm_pf_func_cfg(struct bnxt *bp, int > tx_rings) > HWRM_FUNC_CFG_INPUT_ENABLES_NUM_VNICS | > HWRM_FUNC_CFG_INPUT_ENABLES_NUM_HW_RING_GRPS); > req.flags = rte_cpu_to_le_32(bp->pf.func_cfg_flags); > - req.mtu = rte_cpu_to_le_16(bp->eth_dev->data->mtu + ETHER_HDR_LEN + > - ETHER_CRC_LEN + VLAN_TAG_SIZE); > + req.mtu = rte_cpu_to_le_16(BNXT_MAX_MTU); Just question, would this cause larger frames than expected in application? > req.mru = rte_cpu_to_le_16(bp->eth_dev->data->mtu + ETHER_HDR_LEN + > ETHER_CRC_LEN + VLAN_TAG_SIZE); > req.num_rsscos_ctxs = rte_cpu_to_le_16(bp->max_rsscos_ctx); >
