From: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>
To: "Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net>
Cc: "David Laight" <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
"Zhi Wang" <zhiw@nvidia.com>, <dakr@kernel.org>,
<airlied@gmail.com>, <simona@ffwll.ch>, <ojeda@kernel.org>,
<alex.gaynor@gmail.com>, <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
<bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>, <lossin@kernel.org>,
<a.hindborg@kernel.org>, <aliceryhl@google.com>,
<tmgross@umich.edu>, <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
<ecourtney@nvidia.com>, <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
<apopple@nvidia.com>, <cjia@nvidia.com>, <smitra@nvidia.com>,
<kjaju@nvidia.com>, <alkumar@nvidia.com>, <ankita@nvidia.com>,
<aniketa@nvidia.com>, <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
<targupta@nvidia.com>, <nova-gpu@lists.linux.dev>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <zhiwang@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] PCI/IOV: Return u16 from pci_sriov_get_totalvfs()
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:45:53 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DJHPRE4TGGT8.BUTMYOF5YE05@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DJHNQRALREG5.37R3M4GQ2A29V@garyguo.net>
On Thu Jun 25, 2026 at 8:11 AM JST, Gary Guo wrote:
> On Wed Jun 24, 2026 at 8:38 PM BST, David Laight wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 23:59:56 +0900
>> "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed Jun 24, 2026 at 10:39 PM JST, David Laight wrote:
>>> > On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 21:40:52 +0900
>>> > "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Tue Jun 23, 2026 at 4:43 AM JST, Zhi Wang wrote:
>>> >> > pci_sriov_get_totalvfs() reports a VF count, not an errno-style
>>> >> > status. It returns 0 when SR-IOV is unavailable or the device is not a
>>> >> > PF, and otherwise returns the PF's driver_max_VFs value.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > driver_max_VFs is stored as a u16 in struct pci_sriov. It is derived
>>> >> > from the SR-IOV TotalVFs field or from a driver-provided limit, so the
>>> >> > implementation cannot return a negative value.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Change the declaration, CONFIG_PCI_IOV stub, and implementation to
>>> >> > return u16. Update callers to store the result in u16 variables, remove
>>> >> > obsolete negative-value checks, and use unsigned format specifiers where
>>> >> > needed.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
>>> >> > Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
>>> >> > Signed-off-by: Zhi Wang <zhiw@nvidia.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> Suggested-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
>>> >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/DETDILPA1GFY.27WND0TEC5352@nvidia.com/
>>> >>
>>> >> > ---
>>> >> > drivers/crypto/hisilicon/qm.c | 8 +++++---
>>> >> > drivers/crypto/intel/qat/qat_common/adf_sriov.c | 6 +++---
>>> >> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sriov_pf.c | 6 ++----
>>> >> > drivers/misc/genwqe/card_base.c | 6 ++----
>>> >> > drivers/net/ethernet/cavium/thunder/nic_main.c | 2 +-
>>> >> > drivers/net/ethernet/emulex/benet/be_main.c | 3 ++-
>>> >> > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/sriov.c | 3 ++-
>>> >> > drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef10_sriov.c | 2 +-
>>> >>
>>> >> I believe that you can avoid converting all these drivers in this patch.
>>> >> The implicit `u16 -> int` conversion done by C should result in the
>>> >> expected behavior, and it will be fewer Acked-by to collect.
>>> >
>>> > The generated code is also likely to be slightly better if the function
>>> > return value is a 32bit value.
>>> >
>>> > Similarly you don't really want to do any kind of maths on local variables
>>> > that aren't 32bit (or 64bit on 64bit builds).
>>> >
>>> > The fact that the domain of a value fits in 16 bits doesn't mean that
>>> > it is better to use u16 - it is usually worse.
>>> > Pretty much the only place u16 should be used is to reduce the size
>>> > of structures.
>>> >
>>> > So it is probably correct to change the return type to unsigned int and
>>> > remove the error return checks, but nothing else.
>>>
>>> For C, I agree that unsigned int is the safest type.
>>>
>>> Rust otoh does not do implicit integer promotion, and making it return a
>>> `u16` carries useful range information. I wonder if we could have a
>>> private `__pci_sriov_get_totalvfs` that returns a `u16`, make
>>> `pci_sriov_get_totalvfs` promote it to an `unsigned int` and return it,
>>> while the Rust bindings would invoke `__pci_sriov_get_totalvfs` so they
>>> can expose a `u16`?
>
> There're no value in having two versions with just slightly different promotion
> behaviour. Rust side can still use u16 by casting from unsigned int without
> having to expose both.
Indeed, that occurred to me only after I sent my reply. Since the
register this value originates from is 16 bits, we can justify that a
cast of the return to u16 won't lose any data.
Just making the C API return unsigned int is fine then.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-25 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20260622194353.1308872-1-zhiw@nvidia.com>
2026-06-22 19:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] PCI/IOV: Return u16 from pci_sriov_get_totalvfs() Zhi Wang
2026-06-24 12:40 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-06-24 13:39 ` David Laight
2026-06-24 14:59 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-06-24 19:38 ` David Laight
2026-06-24 23:11 ` Gary Guo
2026-06-25 0:45 ` Alexandre Courbot [this message]
2026-06-22 19:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] rust: pci: Add sriov_get_totalvfs() helper Zhi Wang
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=DJHPRE4TGGT8.BUTMYOF5YE05@nvidia.com \
--to=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=a.hindborg@kernel.org \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=alex.gaynor@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=alkumar@nvidia.com \
--cc=aniketa@nvidia.com \
--cc=ankita@nvidia.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=cjia@nvidia.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=ecourtney@nvidia.com \
--cc=gary@garyguo.net \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=kjaju@nvidia.com \
--cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lossin@kernel.org \
--cc=nova-gpu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=smitra@nvidia.com \
--cc=targupta@nvidia.com \
--cc=tmgross@umich.edu \
--cc=zhiw@nvidia.com \
--cc=zhiwang@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox