All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com
Cc: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>,
	intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, jan.glaza@intel.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 3/4] ice: support RDMA on 4+-port E830 devices
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 16:56:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260420155604.576318-1-horms@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260417062954.1241900-4-aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com>

From: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>

This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
Full review at: https://sashiko.dev
---
ice: support RDMA on 4+-port E830 devices

This patch narrows the RDMA capability check to keep RDMA enabled for E830
devices configured with more than 4 ports, as they do not share the
limitations of E810 and E82X devices.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> @@ -2509,7 +2509,7 @@ ice_recalc_port_limited_caps(struct ice_hw *hw, struct ice_hw_common_caps *caps)
>  		caps->maxtc = 4;
>  		ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "reducing maxtc to %d (based on #ports)\n",
>  			  caps->maxtc);
> -		if (caps->rdma) {
> +		if (caps->rdma && hw->mac_type != ICE_MAC_E830) {
>  			ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "forcing RDMA off\n");
>  			caps->rdma = 0;
>  		}

Does this leave the diagnostic message further down out of sync with the
new condition?

If the device is an E830 with more than 4 ports, RDMA remains enabled, but
because the dev_info() call just below this block is evaluated for all
devices with more than 4 ports:

ice_recalc_port_limited_caps() {
	if (hw->dev_caps.num_funcs > 4) {
		...
		if (caps->rdma && hw->mac_type != ICE_MAC_E830) {
			ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "forcing RDMA off\n");
			caps->rdma = 0;
		}

		/* print message only when processing device capabilities
		 * during initialization.
		 */
		if (caps == &hw->dev_caps.common_cap)
			dev_info(ice_hw_to_dev(hw), "RDMA functionality is not available with the current device configuration.\n");
	}
}

Could this cause confusion by logging a warning about RDMA being disabled
when it is actually active?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com
Cc: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>,
	intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, jan.glaza@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-net 3/4] ice: support RDMA on 4+-port E830 devices
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 16:56:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260420155604.576318-1-horms@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260417062954.1241900-4-aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com>

From: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>

This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
Full review at: https://sashiko.dev
---
ice: support RDMA on 4+-port E830 devices

This patch narrows the RDMA capability check to keep RDMA enabled for E830
devices configured with more than 4 ports, as they do not share the
limitations of E810 and E82X devices.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> @@ -2509,7 +2509,7 @@ ice_recalc_port_limited_caps(struct ice_hw *hw, struct ice_hw_common_caps *caps)
>  		caps->maxtc = 4;
>  		ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "reducing maxtc to %d (based on #ports)\n",
>  			  caps->maxtc);
> -		if (caps->rdma) {
> +		if (caps->rdma && hw->mac_type != ICE_MAC_E830) {
>  			ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "forcing RDMA off\n");
>  			caps->rdma = 0;
>  		}

Does this leave the diagnostic message further down out of sync with the
new condition?

If the device is an E830 with more than 4 ports, RDMA remains enabled, but
because the dev_info() call just below this block is evaluated for all
devices with more than 4 ports:

ice_recalc_port_limited_caps() {
	if (hw->dev_caps.num_funcs > 4) {
		...
		if (caps->rdma && hw->mac_type != ICE_MAC_E830) {
			ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "forcing RDMA off\n");
			caps->rdma = 0;
		}

		/* print message only when processing device capabilities
		 * during initialization.
		 */
		if (caps == &hw->dev_caps.common_cap)
			dev_info(ice_hw_to_dev(hw), "RDMA functionality is not available with the current device configuration.\n");
	}
}

Could this cause confusion by logging a warning about RDMA being disabled
when it is actually active?

  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-20 15:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-17  6:29 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 0/4] ice: fixes for pause reporting, autoneg, RDMA and EIPE Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-17  6:29 ` Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-17  6:29 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 1/4] ice: fix asymmetric pause negotiation reporting in ethtool Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-17  6:29   ` Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-20 15:40   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Simon Horman
2026-04-20 15:40     ` Simon Horman
2026-04-17  6:29 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 2/4] ice: fix autoneg disable when link partner doesn't support AN Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-17  6:29   ` Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-20 15:54   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Simon Horman
2026-04-20 15:54     ` Simon Horman
2026-04-17  6:29 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 3/4] ice: support RDMA on 4+-port E830 devices Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-17  6:29   ` Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-20 15:56   ` Simon Horman [this message]
2026-04-20 15:56     ` Simon Horman
2026-04-17  6:29 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 4/4] ice: report EIPE checksum errors to the OS on E830 Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-17  6:29   ` Aleksandr Loktionov
2026-04-20 15:57   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Simon Horman
2026-04-20 15:57     ` Simon Horman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260420155604.576318-1-horms@kernel.org \
    --to=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com \
    --cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jan.glaza@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.