On 06/21/10 17:02, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
quoted text > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 10:23:00AM +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
>> On 06/18/10 19:09, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 06:55:38AM -0400, Amerigo Wang wrote:
>>>> +static int mlx4_ethtool_op_set_flags(struct net_device *dev, u32 data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct mlx4_en_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>>>> + struct mlx4_en_dev *mdev = priv->mdev;
>>>> + int rc = 0;
>>>> + int changed = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (data& (ETH_FLAG_NTUPLE | ETH_FLAG_RXHASH))
>>>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> As we are here, better would be
> if (data& ~ETH_FLAG_LRO)
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> code will persist correct when someone add new flags.
Yeah, better.
quoted text >
>>>> +
>>>> + if (data& ETH_FLAG_LRO) {
>>>> + if (!(dev->features& NETIF_F_LRO))
>>>> + changed = 1;
>>>> + } else if (dev->features& NETIF_F_LRO) {
>>>> + changed = 1;
>>>> + mdev->profile.num_lro = 0;
>>>
>>> Everything fine except that, what for you zero num_lro value?
>>>
>>> If we set it to zero it will stay zero and we will not create
>>> proper number of lro descriptors in mlx4_en_create_rx_ring()
>>> (called from mlx4_en_set_ringparam() -> mlx4_en_alloc_resources())
>>> when someone enable LRO again on.
>>>
>>
>> Huh? Isn't ->num_lro which controls LRO of mlx4 driver?
>
> It is, but only in mlx4_en_add() just before register_netdev(),
> when we setup default dev->features. Otherwise dev->features
> tells if LRO is enabled or disabled.
>
> This realize me, that we should not dev->features |= NETIF_F_LRO
> if mdev->profile.num_lro == 0 .
>
Got it! I misunderstood ->num_lro. :( Setting NETIF_F_LRO should be enough
for mlx4 driver...
I will send the updated version.
Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
