RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next v4 6/8] octeon_ep: support asynchronous notifications

Veerasenareddy Burru
2023-03-23T17:25:30Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2023 3:39 AM
> To: Veerasenareddy Burru <vburru@marvell.com>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Abhijit Ayarekar
> <aayarekar@marvell.com>; Sathesh B Edara <sedara@marvell.com>;
> Satananda Burla <sburla@marvell.com>; linux-doc@vger.kernel.org; David S.
> Miller <davem@davemloft.net>; Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>;
> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>; Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next v4 6/8] octeon_ep: support
> asynchronous notifications
>
> External Email
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 02:19:55AM -0700, Veerasenareddy Burru wrote:
> > Add asynchronous notification support to the control mailbox.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Veerasenareddy Burru <vburru@marvell.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Abhijit Ayarekar <aayarekar@marvell.com>
> > ---
> > v3 -> v4:
> > * 0005-xxx.patch in v3 is 0006-xxx.patch in v4.
> > * addressed review comments
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__lore.kernel.org_all_Y-2B0J94sowllCe5Gs-
> 40boxer_&d=DwIBAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=XkP_75lnbPIeeucsP
> X36ZgjiMqEKttwZfwNyWMCLjT0&m=5CnsD-
> SX6ZoW98szwM0k4IXgNC3wY0EwCQHxDKGyNIRUJxdaNe3zorLcOhc9iU6d&s
> =k73McQSsjbjj87VbCCB8EFFtGWtksMIGhn15RK12XF8&e=
> > - fixed rct violation.
> > - process_mbox_notify() now returns void.
> >
> > v2 -> v3:
> > * no change
> >
> > v1 -> v2:
> > * no change
> >
> > .../marvell/octeon_ep/octep_ctrl_net.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_ctrl_net.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_ctrl_net.c
> > index cef4bc3b1ec0..465eef2824e3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_ctrl_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_ctrl_net.c
> > @@ -271,6 +271,33 @@ static void process_mbox_resp(struct
> octep_device *oct,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +static int process_mbox_notify(struct octep_device *oct,
> > + struct octep_ctrl_mbox_msg *msg) {
> > + struct net_device *netdev = oct->netdev;
> > + struct octep_ctrl_net_f2h_req *req;
> > +
> > + req = (struct octep_ctrl_net_f2h_req *)msg->sg_list[0].msg;
> > + switch (req->hdr.s.cmd) {
> > + case OCTEP_CTRL_NET_F2H_CMD_LINK_STATUS:
> > + if (netif_running(netdev)) {
> > + if (req->link.state) {
> > + dev_info(&oct->pdev->dev,
> "netif_carrier_on\n");
> > + netif_carrier_on(netdev);
> > + } else {
> > + dev_info(&oct->pdev->dev,
> "netif_carrier_off\n");
> > + netif_carrier_off(netdev);
> > + }
>
> Shouldn't netdev changes be protected by some lock?
> Is is safe to get event from FW and process it as is?
>
> Thanks

Thanks for the kind feedback.
I do not see netif_carrier_on/off require any protection. I referred few other drivers and do not see such protection used for carrier on/off.
Please suggest if I am missing something here.