Re: [PATCH v9 11/22] IB/hns: Add IB device registration

Leon Romanovsky
2016-06-13T12:46:45Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3005 bytes --]

On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 05:41:06PM +0800, Wei Hu (Xavier) wrote:
>
>
> On 2016/6/9 14:26, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 11:37:53PM +0800, Lijun Ou wrote:
> >>This patch registered IB device when loaded, and unregistered
> >>IB device when removed.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Wei Hu <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>
> >>Signed-off-by: Nenglong Zhao <zhaonenglong@hisilicon.com>
> >>Signed-off-by: Lijun Ou <oulijun@huawei.com>
> >>---
> >> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_main.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_main.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_main.c
> >>index 7fb0d34..f179a7f 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_main.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_main.c
> >>@@ -62,6 +62,41 @@
> >> #include "hns_roce_device.h"
> >> #include "hns_roce_icm.h"
> >>+void hns_roce_unregister_device(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev)
> >You are not calling to this function in this patch.
> >
> >>+{
> >>+ ib_unregister_device(&hr_dev->ib_dev);
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>+int hns_roce_register_device(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev)
> >This function should be static.
> >
> >>+{
> >>+ int ret;
> >>+ struct hns_roce_ib_iboe *iboe = NULL;
> >>+ struct ib_device *ib_dev = NULL;
> >>+ struct device *dev = &hr_dev->pdev->dev;
> >>+
> >>+ iboe = &hr_dev->iboe;
> >>+
> >>+ ib_dev = &hr_dev->ib_dev;
> >>+ strlcpy(ib_dev->name, "hisi_%d", IB_DEVICE_NAME_MAX);
> >>+
> >>+ ib_dev->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> >>+ ib_dev->node_type = RDMA_NODE_IB_CA;
> >>+ ib_dev->dma_device = dev;
> >>+
> >>+ ib_dev->phys_port_cnt = hr_dev->caps.num_ports;
> >>+ ib_dev->local_dma_lkey = hr_dev->caps.reserved_lkey;
> >>+ ib_dev->num_comp_vectors = hr_dev->caps.num_comp_vectors;
> >>+ ib_dev->uverbs_abi_ver = 1;
> >>+
> >>+ ret = ib_register_device(ib_dev, NULL);
> >>+ if (ret) {
> >>+ dev_err(dev, "ib_register_device failed!\n");
> >>+ return ret;
> >>+ }
> >>+
> >>+ return 0;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >> int hns_roce_get_cfg(struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev)
> >> {
> >> int i;
> >>@@ -363,6 +398,17 @@ static int hns_roce_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> goto error_failed_engine_init;
> >> }
> >>+ ret = hns_roce_register_device(hr_dev);
> >>+ if (ret) {
> >>+ dev_err(dev, "register_device failed!\n");
> >According to the current code, you will print this error together with
> >error line in hns_roce_register_device for the same failure.
> >
> >"ib_register_device failed!"
> >"register_device failed!"
> Hi, leon
> In this patch [PATCH v9 11/22], there is only one error branch in
> funtion named hns_roce_register_device.
> In the following patch [PATCH v9 13/22], we add more operation, there
> are more
> than two error branch in this function as below.

Yes, and in all these error flows you already printed debug messages, your
"register_device failed" print is useless.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]