> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 01:38:22PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_vf.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_vf.c
> > index d7d9a720069b..072e5b40a199 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_vf.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_vf.c
> > @@ -165,6 +165,8 @@ static void enetc_vf_netdev_setup(struct enetc_si *si,
> struct net_device *ndev,
> > static const struct enetc_si_ops enetc_vsi_ops = {
> > .setup_cbdr = enetc_setup_cbdr,
> > .teardown_cbdr = enetc_teardown_cbdr,
> > + .get_rss_table = enetc_get_rss_table,
> > + .set_rss_table = enetc_set_rss_table,
> > };
>
> Are the CBDR-based enetc_get_rss_table() and enetc_set_rss_table()
> the correct implementations for NETC v4 VSIs? (I guess not). Does
> the driver/hardware fail in a civilized way, or does it crash?
We have not added ENETC v4 VSI support yet, the current VSI driver
is only applicable to v1. I will add enetc4_vsi_ops when supporting
v4 VSI.
