| Message ID | 20241024065328.521518-12-wei.fang@nxp.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | add basic support for i.MX95 NETC | expand |
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 02:53:26PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote: > From: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@nxp.com> > > There is a situation where num_tx_rings cannot be divided by bdr_int_num. > For example, num_tx_rings is 8 and bdr_int_num is 3. According to the > previous logic, this results in two tx_bdr corresponding memories not > being allocated, so when sending packets to tx ring 6 or 7, wild pointers > will be accessed. Of course, this issue doesn't exist on LS1028A, because > its num_tx_rings is 8, and bdr_int_num is either 1 or 2. However, there > is a risk for the upcoming i.MX95. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure > that each tx_bdr can be allocated to the corresponding memory. > > Signed-off-by: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@nxp.com> > Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@nxp.com> > Reviewed-by: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com> > Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com> > --- > v5: no changes > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > index bd725561b8a2..bccbeb1f355c 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > @@ -3049,10 +3049,10 @@ static void enetc_int_vector_destroy(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv, int i) > int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) > { > struct pci_dev *pdev = priv->si->pdev; > + int v_tx_rings, v_remainder; > int num_stack_tx_queues; > int first_xdp_tx_ring; > int i, n, err, nvec; > - int v_tx_rings; > > nvec = ENETC_BDR_INT_BASE_IDX + priv->bdr_int_num; > /* allocate MSIX for both messaging and Rx/Tx interrupts */ > @@ -3066,9 +3066,12 @@ int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) > > /* # of tx rings per int vector */ > v_tx_rings = priv->num_tx_rings / priv->bdr_int_num; > + v_remainder = priv->num_tx_rings % priv->bdr_int_num; > > for (i = 0; i < priv->bdr_int_num; i++) { > - err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, v_tx_rings); > + int num_tx_rings = i < v_remainder ? v_tx_rings + 1 : v_tx_rings; It took me a moment to understand the mechanism through which this works, even though I read the intention in the commit message. Do you think this additional comment would help? /* Distribute the remaining TX rings to the first * v_tx_rings interrupt vectors */ > + > + err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, num_tx_rings); > if (err) > goto fail; > } > -- > 2.34.1 >
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 02:53:26PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote: > > From: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@nxp.com> > > > > There is a situation where num_tx_rings cannot be divided by bdr_int_num. > > For example, num_tx_rings is 8 and bdr_int_num is 3. According to the > > previous logic, this results in two tx_bdr corresponding memories not > > being allocated, so when sending packets to tx ring 6 or 7, wild pointers > > will be accessed. Of course, this issue doesn't exist on LS1028A, because > > its num_tx_rings is 8, and bdr_int_num is either 1 or 2. However, there > > is a risk for the upcoming i.MX95. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure > > that each tx_bdr can be allocated to the corresponding memory. > > > > Signed-off-by: Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@nxp.com> > > Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@nxp.com> > > Reviewed-by: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com> > > Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com> > > --- > > v5: no changes > > --- > > drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c | 7 +++++-- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > > index bd725561b8a2..bccbeb1f355c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c > > @@ -3049,10 +3049,10 @@ static void enetc_int_vector_destroy(struct > enetc_ndev_priv *priv, int i) > > int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) > > { > > struct pci_dev *pdev = priv->si->pdev; > > + int v_tx_rings, v_remainder; > > int num_stack_tx_queues; > > int first_xdp_tx_ring; > > int i, n, err, nvec; > > - int v_tx_rings; > > > > nvec = ENETC_BDR_INT_BASE_IDX + priv->bdr_int_num; > > /* allocate MSIX for both messaging and Rx/Tx interrupts */ > > @@ -3066,9 +3066,12 @@ int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv > *priv) > > > > /* # of tx rings per int vector */ > > v_tx_rings = priv->num_tx_rings / priv->bdr_int_num; > > + v_remainder = priv->num_tx_rings % priv->bdr_int_num; > > > > for (i = 0; i < priv->bdr_int_num; i++) { > > - err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, v_tx_rings); > > + int num_tx_rings = i < v_remainder ? v_tx_rings + 1 : v_tx_rings; > > It took me a moment to understand the mechanism through which this > works, even though I read the intention in the commit message. > > Do you think this additional comment would help? Yeah, it does help users understand quickly. I will add this comment. > > /* Distribute the remaining TX rings to the first > * v_tx_rings interrupt vectors > */ > > > + > > + err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, num_tx_rings); > > if (err) > > goto fail; > > } > > -- > > 2.34.1 > >
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c index bd725561b8a2..bccbeb1f355c 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc.c @@ -3049,10 +3049,10 @@ static void enetc_int_vector_destroy(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv, int i) int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) { struct pci_dev *pdev = priv->si->pdev; + int v_tx_rings, v_remainder; int num_stack_tx_queues; int first_xdp_tx_ring; int i, n, err, nvec; - int v_tx_rings; nvec = ENETC_BDR_INT_BASE_IDX + priv->bdr_int_num; /* allocate MSIX for both messaging and Rx/Tx interrupts */ @@ -3066,9 +3066,12 @@ int enetc_alloc_msix(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv) /* # of tx rings per int vector */ v_tx_rings = priv->num_tx_rings / priv->bdr_int_num; + v_remainder = priv->num_tx_rings % priv->bdr_int_num; for (i = 0; i < priv->bdr_int_num; i++) { - err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, v_tx_rings); + int num_tx_rings = i < v_remainder ? v_tx_rings + 1 : v_tx_rings; + + err = enetc_int_vector_init(priv, i, num_tx_rings); if (err) goto fail; }