[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net v1] i40e: Fix to various static analysis warnings

[Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>]

J?drzej Jagielski wrote:

> Fix static analysis warnings from sparse.

Was this on top of the series that I had already sent upstream? It just
went to net-next last week (after several months)

When I sent a series like this before, davem required that I put all
the fixed errors in the commit message (not a full text, but a
summary), and I then proceeded to put the full text of the errors in
the commit message after a "triple-dash" so they would be there for
reviewers, but gone from commit log.


> 
> Fixes: e793095e8a57 ("i40e: add parsing of flexible filter fields from userdef")
> Signed-off-by: Sylwester Dziedziuch <sylwesterx.dziedziuch@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jedrzej Jagielski <jedrzej.jagielski@intel.com>
> Suggested-by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ethtool.c     | 14 +++++++-------
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.h |  2 +-
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ethtool.c
> index 3e822bad4..cbd640e0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ethtool.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_ethtool.c
> @@ -3138,8 +3138,8 @@ static int i40e_parse_rx_flow_user_data(struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec *fsp,
>  	if (!(fsp->flow_type & FLOW_EXT))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	value = be64_to_cpu(*((__be64 *)fsp->h_ext.data));
> -	mask = be64_to_cpu(*((__be64 *)fsp->m_ext.data));
> +	value = be64_to_cpu(*((__force __be64 *)fsp->h_ext.data));
> +	mask = be64_to_cpu(*((__force __be64 *)fsp->m_ext.data));
>  
>  #define I40E_USERDEF_FLEX_WORD		GENMASK_ULL(15, 0)
>  #define I40E_USERDEF_FLEX_OFFSET	GENMASK_ULL(31, 16)
> @@ -3180,8 +3180,8 @@ static void i40e_fill_rx_flow_user_data(struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec *fsp,
>  	if (value || mask)
>  		fsp->flow_type |= FLOW_EXT;
>  
> -	*((__be64 *)fsp->h_ext.data) = cpu_to_be64(value);
> -	*((__be64 *)fsp->m_ext.data) = cpu_to_be64(mask);
> +	*((__force __be64 *)fsp->h_ext.data) = cpu_to_be64(value);
> +	*((__force __be64 *)fsp->m_ext.data) = cpu_to_be64(mask);
>  }
>  
>  /**
> @@ -4150,9 +4150,9 @@ static int i40e_check_fdir_input_set(struct i40e_vsi *vsi,
>  				     struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec *fsp,
>  				     struct i40e_rx_flow_userdef *userdef)
>  {
> -	static const __be32 ipv6_full_mask[4] = {cpu_to_be32(0xffffffff),
> +	static const __be32 ipv6_full_mask[4] = {
>  		cpu_to_be32(0xffffffff), cpu_to_be32(0xffffffff),
> -		cpu_to_be32(0xffffffff)};
> +		cpu_to_be32(0xffffffff), cpu_to_be32(0xffffffff)};

This looks like just a whitespace change, why include it in this patch?

>  	struct ethtool_tcpip6_spec *tcp_ip6_spec;
>  	struct ethtool_usrip6_spec *usr_ip6_spec;
>  	struct ethtool_tcpip4_spec *tcp_ip4_spec;
> @@ -5599,7 +5599,7 @@ static int i40e_set_eee(struct net_device *netdev, struct ethtool_eee *edata)
>  		config.eeer |= cpu_to_le32(I40E_PRTPM_EEER_TX_LPI_EN_MASK);
>  	} else {
>  		config.eee_capability = 0;
> -		config.eeer &= cpu_to_le32(~I40E_PRTPM_EEER_TX_LPI_EN_MASK);
> +		config.eeer &= ~cpu_to_le32(I40E_PRTPM_EEER_TX_LPI_EN_MASK);
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Apply modified PHY configuration */
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.h
> index 49575a640..e406fee93 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_virtchnl_pf.h
> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ struct i40e_vf {
>  	u16 stag;
>  
>  	struct virtchnl_ether_addr default_lan_addr;
> -	u16 port_vlan_id;
> +	s16 port_vlan_id;

How could vlan ever be negative? I don't think this is a good change,
it seems like it might introduce bugs, not fix them. And I don't know
why it would be useful or why you made the change.

>  	bool pf_set_mac;	/* The VMM admin set the VF MAC address */
>  	bool trusted;
>