On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 10:37:31AM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
> igc_xdp_run_prog() converts customed xdp action to a negative error code
> with the sk_buff pointer type which be checked with IS_ERR in
> igc_clean_rx_irq(). Remove this error pointer handing instead use plain
> int return value to fix this smatch warnings:
> 
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c:2533
>  igc_xdp_run_prog() warn: passing zero to 'ERR_PTR'
> 
> Fixes: 26575105d6ed ("igc: Add initial XDP support")
> Signed-off-by: Yue Haibing <yuehaib...@huawei.com>

Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkow...@intel.com>

> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c | 20 +++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c 
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> index 6e70bca15db1..5e44c2546a12 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> @@ -2123,10 +2123,6 @@ static bool igc_cleanup_headers(struct igc_ring 
> *rx_ring,
>                               union igc_adv_rx_desc *rx_desc,
>                               struct sk_buff *skb)
>  {
> -     /* XDP packets use error pointer so abort at this point */
> -     if (IS_ERR(skb))
> -             return true;
> -
>       if (unlikely(igc_test_staterr(rx_desc, IGC_RXDEXT_STATERR_RXE))) {
>               struct net_device *netdev = rx_ring->netdev;
>  
> @@ -2515,8 +2511,7 @@ static int __igc_xdp_run_prog(struct igc_adapter 
> *adapter,
>       }
>  }
>  
> -static struct sk_buff *igc_xdp_run_prog(struct igc_adapter *adapter,
> -                                     struct xdp_buff *xdp)
> +static int igc_xdp_run_prog(struct igc_adapter *adapter, struct xdp_buff 
> *xdp)
>  {
>       struct bpf_prog *prog;
>       int res;
> @@ -2530,7 +2525,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *igc_xdp_run_prog(struct 
> igc_adapter *adapter,
>       res = __igc_xdp_run_prog(adapter, prog, xdp);
>  
>  out:
> -     return ERR_PTR(-res);
> +     return res;
>  }
>  
>  /* This function assumes __netif_tx_lock is held by the caller. */
> @@ -2585,6 +2580,7 @@ static int igc_clean_rx_irq(struct igc_q_vector 
> *q_vector, const int budget)
>       struct sk_buff *skb = rx_ring->skb;
>       u16 cleaned_count = igc_desc_unused(rx_ring);
>       int xdp_status = 0, rx_buffer_pgcnt;
> +     int xdp_res = 0;
>  
>       while (likely(total_packets < budget)) {
>               struct igc_xdp_buff ctx = { .rx_ts = NULL };
> @@ -2630,12 +2626,10 @@ static int igc_clean_rx_irq(struct igc_q_vector 
> *q_vector, const int budget)
>                       xdp_buff_clear_frags_flag(&ctx.xdp);
>                       ctx.rx_desc = rx_desc;
>  
> -                     skb = igc_xdp_run_prog(adapter, &ctx.xdp);
> +                     xdp_res = igc_xdp_run_prog(adapter, &ctx.xdp);
>               }
>  
> -             if (IS_ERR(skb)) {
> -                     unsigned int xdp_res = -PTR_ERR(skb);
> -
> +             if (xdp_res) {
>                       switch (xdp_res) {
>                       case IGC_XDP_CONSUMED:
>                               rx_buffer->pagecnt_bias++;
> @@ -2657,7 +2651,7 @@ static int igc_clean_rx_irq(struct igc_q_vector 
> *q_vector, const int budget)
>                       skb = igc_construct_skb(rx_ring, rx_buffer, &ctx);
>  
>               /* exit if we failed to retrieve a buffer */
> -             if (!skb) {
> +             if (!xdp_res && !skb) {
>                       rx_ring->rx_stats.alloc_failed++;
>                       rx_buffer->pagecnt_bias++;
>                       set_bit(IGC_RING_FLAG_RX_ALLOC_FAILED, &rx_ring->flags);
> @@ -2672,7 +2666,7 @@ static int igc_clean_rx_irq(struct igc_q_vector 
> *q_vector, const int budget)
>                       continue;
>  
>               /* verify the packet layout is correct */
> -             if (igc_cleanup_headers(rx_ring, rx_desc, skb)) {
> +             if (xdp_res || igc_cleanup_headers(rx_ring, rx_desc, skb)) {
>                       skb = NULL;
>                       continue;
>               }
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

Reply via email to