From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2D02C47094 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 06:26:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B8161351 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 06:26:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229740AbhFJG2b convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2021 02:28:31 -0400 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.187]:9056 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229725AbhFJG2b (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2021 02:28:31 -0400 Received: from dggemv711-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.55]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4G0v7M0LxBzZcXD; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:23:43 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpeml500024.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.10) by dggemv711-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:26:33 +0800 Received: from dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.195) by dggpeml500024.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:26:33 +0800 Received: from dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.48.84]) by dggema753-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.9.48.84]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:26:33 +0800 From: liweihang To: Leon Romanovsky CC: "dledford@redhat.com" , "jgg@nvidia.com" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , Linuxarm , "wangxi (M)" Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next] RDMA/hns: Clear extended doorbell info before using Thread-Topic: [PATCH for-next] RDMA/hns: Clear extended doorbell info before using Thread-Index: AQHXXSAv9wr4Vl744ku7FYzI09T5Zw== Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 06:26:33 +0000 Message-ID: <45f10d85bd794db4a107489efd327162@huawei.com> References: <1623237065-43344-1-git-send-email-liweihang@huawei.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.67.100.165] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 2021/6/9 21:44, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 07:11:05PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote: >> From: Xi Wang >> >> Both of HIP08 and HIP09 require the extended doorbell information to be >> cleared before being used. > > Is it bugfix or feature? > For the fix, it needs to have Fixes ... line. > It is a bugfix, I will add a fixes tag, thanks. >> >> Signed-off-by: Xi Wang >> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li >> --- >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c >> index fbc45b9..c5d2cfb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c >> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c >> @@ -1572,6 +1572,20 @@ static void hns_roce_function_clear(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev) >> } >> } >> >> +static void hns_roce_clear_extdb_list_info(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev) >> +{ >> + struct hns_roce_cmq_desc desc; >> + int ret; >> + >> + hns_roce_cmq_setup_basic_desc(&desc, HNS_ROCE_OPC_CLEAR_EXTDB_LIST_INFO, >> + false); >> + ret = hns_roce_cmq_send(hr_dev, &desc, 1); >> + if (ret) >> + ibdev_warn(&hr_dev->ib_dev, >> + "failed to clear extended doorbell info, ret = %d.\n", >> + ret); >> +} >> + >> static int hns_roce_query_fw_ver(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev) >> { >> struct hns_roce_query_fw_info *resp; >> @@ -2684,6 +2698,8 @@ static int hns_roce_v2_init(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev) >> if (ret) >> return ret; >> >> + /* The hns ROCEE requires the extdb info to be cleared before using */ >> + hns_roce_clear_extdb_list_info(hr_dev); > > If it "requires", why do you proceed anyway? Why don't you check for > success/failure? > > Thanks > You are right, we should check for it's return value. Weihang >> if (hr_dev->is_vf) >> return 0; >> >> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h >> index cd361c0..073e835 100644 >> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h >> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h >> @@ -250,6 +250,7 @@ enum hns_roce_opcode_type { >> HNS_ROCE_OPC_CLR_SCCC = 0x8509, >> HNS_ROCE_OPC_QUERY_SCCC = 0x850a, >> HNS_ROCE_OPC_RESET_SCCC = 0x850b, >> + HNS_ROCE_OPC_CLEAR_EXTDB_LIST_INFO = 0x850d, >> HNS_ROCE_OPC_QUERY_VF_RES = 0x850e, >> HNS_ROCE_OPC_CFG_GMV_TBL = 0x850f, >> HNS_ROCE_OPC_CFG_GMV_BT = 0x8510, >> -- >> 2.7.4 >> >