> +static int
> +lio_pf_switchdev_attr_get(struct net_device *dev, struct switchdev_attr 
> *attr)
> +{
> +     struct lio *lio = GET_LIO(dev);
> +
> +     switch (attr->id) {
> +     case SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PARENT_ID:
> +             attr->u.ppid.id_len = ETH_ALEN;
> +             ether_addr_copy(attr->u.ppid.id,
> +                             (void *)&lio->linfo.hw_addr + 2);

The + 2 seems odd. Please could you explain why it is there?


> +static int lio_vf_rep_open(struct net_device *ndev);
> +static int lio_vf_rep_stop(struct net_device *ndev);
> +static int lio_vf_rep_pkt_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *ndev);
> +static void lio_vf_rep_tx_timeout(struct net_device *netdev);
> +static int lio_vf_rep_phys_port_name(struct net_device *dev,
> +                                  char *buf, size_t len);
> +static void lio_vf_rep_get_stats64(struct net_device *dev,
> +                                struct rtnl_link_stats64 *stats64);
> +static int lio_vf_rep_change_mtu(struct net_device *ndev, int new_mtu);
> +
> +static const struct net_device_ops lio_vf_rep_ndev_ops = {
> +     .ndo_open = lio_vf_rep_open,
> +     .ndo_stop = lio_vf_rep_stop,
> +     .ndo_start_xmit = lio_vf_rep_pkt_xmit,
> +     .ndo_tx_timeout = lio_vf_rep_tx_timeout,
> +     .ndo_get_phys_port_name = lio_vf_rep_phys_port_name,
> +     .ndo_get_stats64 = lio_vf_rep_get_stats64,
> +     .ndo_change_mtu = lio_vf_rep_change_mtu,
> +};

Please don't use forward references. Change the order of the code and
put this structure towards the end of the file.

> +lio_vf_rep_phys_port_name(struct net_device *dev,
> +                       char *buf, size_t len)
> +{
> +     struct lio_vf_rep_desc *vf_rep = netdev_priv(dev);
> +     struct octeon_device *oct = vf_rep->oct;
> +     int ret;
> +
> +     ret = snprintf(buf, len, "pf%dvf%d", oct->pf_num,
> +                    vf_rep->ifidx - oct->pf_num * 64 - 1);
> +     if (ret >= len)
> +             return -EOPNOTSUPP;

EOPNOTSUPP seems an odd return code for too short a buffer?

           Andrew

Reply via email to