[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 1/2] idpf: correct queue index in Rx allocation error messages

[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 1/2] idpf: correct queue index in Rx allocation error messages

[Alok Tiwari]

The error messages in idpf_rx_desc_alloc_all() used the group index i
when reporting memory allocation failures for individual Rx and Rx buffer
queues. The correct index to report is j, which represents the specific
queue within the group.

Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
index 828f7c444d30..e29fc5f4012f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
@@ -923,7 +923,7 @@ static int idpf_rx_desc_alloc_all(struct idpf_vport *vport)
 			if (err) {
 				pci_err(vport->adapter->pdev,
 					"Memory allocation for Rx Queue %u failed\n",
-					i);
+					j);
 				goto err_out;
 			}
 		}
@@ -940,7 +940,7 @@ static int idpf_rx_desc_alloc_all(struct idpf_vport *vport)
 			if (err) {
 				pci_err(vport->adapter->pdev,
 					"Memory allocation for Rx Buffer Queue %u failed\n",
-					i);
+					j);
 				goto err_out;
 			}
 		}
-- 
2.50.1

[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 2/2] idpf: fix typos and correct doc comments in idpf driver

[Alok Tiwari]

- Corrected a typo: "controq" -> "control"
- Updated return value description to accurately reflect behaviour:
  changed "Returns true if there's any budget left" ->
  "Returns number of packets cleaned from this queue"

Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_controlq.c     | 2 +-
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_controlq.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_controlq.c
index 67894eda2d29..59558e2f45cf 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_controlq.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_controlq.c
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ static void idpf_ctlq_init_rxq_bufs(struct idpf_ctlq_info *cq)
  * @hw: pointer to hw struct
  * @cq: pointer to the specific Control queue
  *
- * The main shutdown routine for any controq queue
+ * The main shutdown routine for any control queue
  */
 static void idpf_ctlq_shutdown(struct idpf_hw *hw, struct idpf_ctlq_info *cq)
 {
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
index 61e613066140..ffc24a825129 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
@@ -1029,7 +1029,7 @@ static void idpf_xdp_run_pass(struct libeth_xdp_buff *xdp,
  * @rx_q: rx queue to clean
  * @budget: Total limit on number of packets to process
  *
- * Returns true if there's any budget left (e.g. the clean is finished)
+ * Returns number of packets cleaned from this queue
  */
 static int idpf_rx_singleq_clean(struct idpf_rx_queue *rx_q, int budget)
 {
-- 
2.50.1

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 1/2] idpf: correct queue index in Rx allocation error messages

[Simon Horman]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 11:40:54AM -0700, Alok Tiwari wrote:
> The error messages in idpf_rx_desc_alloc_all() used the group index i
> when reporting memory allocation failures for individual Rx and Rx buffer
> queues. The correct index to report is j, which represents the specific
> queue within the group.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com>

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>

...

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 2/2] idpf: fix typos and correct doc comments in idpf driver

[Simon Horman]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 11:40:55AM -0700, Alok Tiwari wrote:

...

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
> index 61e613066140..ffc24a825129 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
> @@ -1029,7 +1029,7 @@ static void idpf_xdp_run_pass(struct libeth_xdp_buff *xdp,
>   * @rx_q: rx queue to clean
>   * @budget: Total limit on number of packets to process
>   *
> - * Returns true if there's any budget left (e.g. the clean is finished)
> + * Returns number of packets cleaned from this queue

Hi Alok,

Perhaps while this line is being updated it could
also be changed to use "Return:" or "Returns:".

Flagged by ./scripts/kernel-doc -none -Wall

>   */
>  static int idpf_rx_singleq_clean(struct idpf_rx_queue *rx_q, int budget)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.50.1
> 

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [External] : Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] idpf: fix typos and correct doc comments in idpf driver

[ALOK TIWARI]

On 10/22/2025 8:10 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 11:40:55AM -0700, Alok Tiwari wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
>> index 61e613066140..ffc24a825129 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_singleq_txrx.c
>> @@ -1029,7 +1029,7 @@ static void idpf_xdp_run_pass(struct libeth_xdp_buff *xdp,
>>    * @rx_q: rx queue to clean
>>    * @budget: Total limit on number of packets to process
>>    *
>> - * Returns true if there's any budget left (e.g. the clean is finished)
>> + * Returns number of packets cleaned from this queue
> 
> Hi Alok,
> 
> Perhaps while this line is being updated it could
> also be changed to use "Return:" or "Returns:".
> 
> Flagged by ./scripts/kernel-doc -none -Wall
> 
>>    */
>>   static int idpf_rx_singleq_clean(struct idpf_rx_queue *rx_q, int budget)
>>   {
>> -- 
>> 2.50.1
>>

Thanks Simon,

It seems that this file, and almost the entire driver uses "Returns" 
rather than "Returns:". In this case, it might be better to keep it 
consistent with the existing style. or
Should we just update this file to use “Returns:” for consistency, or 
would it be better to update the entire driver for consistency instead?

Thanks,
Alok