Mon, May 13, 2024 at 10:37:23AM CEST, michal.swiatkow...@linux.intel.com wrote:
[...]
>+int ice_devlink_create_sf_port(struct ice_dynamic_port *dyn_port)
>+{
>+ struct devlink_port_attrs attrs = {};
>+ struct devlink_port *devlink_port;
>+ struct devlink *devlink;
>+ struct ice_vsi *vsi;
>+ struct device *dev;
>+ struct ice_pf *pf;
>+ int err;
>+
>+ vsi = dyn_port->vsi;
>+ pf = dyn_port->pf;
>+ dev = ice_pf_to_dev(pf);
>+
>+ devlink_port = &dyn_port->devlink_port;
>+
>+ attrs.flavour = DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_PCI_SF;
>+ attrs.pci_sf.pf = pf->hw.bus.func;
>+ attrs.pci_sf.sf = dyn_port->sfnum;
>+
>+ devlink_port_attrs_set(devlink_port, &attrs);
>+ devlink = priv_to_devlink(pf);
>+
>+ err = devl_port_register_with_ops(devlink, devlink_port, vsi->idx,
>+ &ice_devlink_port_sf_ops);
>+ if (err) {
>+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to create devlink port for Subfunction %d",
>+ vsi->idx);
Either use extack or avoid this error message entirely. Could you please
double you don't write dmesg error messages in case you have extack
available in the rest of this patchset?
>+ return err;
>+ }
>+
>+ return 0;
>+}
>+
[...]
