From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7872847C0F7 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:41:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790246512; cv=none; b=csU7wuMC0f7XluJ9voigjaaJAsflRtllLKsp6TZUalWvdwDsIB2cW9r2/TC5y4TehCbEttMS29j4xBrt4E7/+z6XNBRyR5CiAJDQ3Ht7qIKUreN99qKOm2VX1BM1hI5H64c17eu5qVxxqidWneCnLZMkhFzbydGdP7cqgvP35Bo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790246512; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9Q+kGvXtq2/I7x8EiaFwv5p1/ScVejrYTnuLQdzYXSc=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=ElF4ywlEJVrJsWzdaM+/+86g+TpifWd/jHVFDKV73p85zaYLnkT7DCpPsE/0R+uFPr5K7T3iWMgOKNe26rdH91rWx0/3A46xNTbKUxzKZuJtXq6jy90UvjR3XfwVzlg4rgdDHI6sqnMY6R7BcKuk0FSdpA1Q2XFByzWYKMoMJvg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ncpI2IFN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ncpI2IFN" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10F771F00898; Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:41:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790246509; bh=9Q+kGvXtq2/I7x8EiaFwv5p1/ScVejrYTnuLQdzYXSc=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=ncpI2IFNjhL+nPZKFGoV0OQeCeycXT9Na6IeeWsnbRo4Xp687irp7pkSZOgLYITnQ ogPD1c4dVATdTLKtmhN+VZhGRb5Qq+Kofk+a5maxCBfram3EKh72DW4VsqQhxpN8gC cgZaZOXKpdEwbCMGnO7P/Aia3ubcwr3b5NlZ+I7uPyEbEY/h82VlEJPsJacX6rpC8d JOXG7RhMCr21T5ppdyX5gv/uBjUTr/ZIueJdNmG/q7fs9d+D6D7oVlPbxkSandxMiq CwyBFWPucUO/4dXtjfzkE7eGeJk8JipB4WKjEJuq7JHkg2M3lai1d0c/1r/10zkvFA vl4f9u4rjV09Q== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 12/13] net/mlx5: E-switch, correct stale VF/PF wording in esw-allowed comments Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Tariq Toukan" Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260923103830.1183-13-tariqt@nvidia.com> References: <20260923103830.1183-1-tariqt@nvidia.com> <20260923103830.1183-13-tariqt@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 10:41:48 +0000 Message-Id: <20260924104149.10F771F00898@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > From: Shay Drory >=20 > mlx5_esw_hold() and mlx5_eswitch_unblock_ipsec() bail out on > !mlx5_esw_allowed(), and their comments explained that as "a VF has no > eswitch" / "core dev is not a PF". New FW will let a VF act as a nested > e-switch manager - such a VF has an eswitch and passes > mlx5_esw_allowed() - so that equivalence no longer holds. Reword the > comments to describe the actual condition, the device is not an e-switch > manager, with no functional change. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Shay Drory > Reviewed-by: Moshe Shemesh > Reviewed-by: Akiva Goldberger > Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260923103830.1183= -1-tariqt@nvidia.com?part=3D12