Re: [PATCH v11 net-next 09/11] net/nebula-matrix: add Dispatch layer implementation

Simon Horman
2026-04-12T13:00:09Z

This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.

For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
net/nebula-matrix: add Dispatch layer implementation

This patch introduces a control-level routing mechanism for the Dispatch
layer with two routing paths: a direct path (Dispatch -> Resource -> HW)
and a channel path (Dispatch -> Channel). The implementation uses
interface-declared control levels and upper-layer configured control
levels to determine the routing.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/nebula-matrix/nbl/nbl_core/nbl_dispatch.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/nebula-matrix/nbl/nbl_core/nbl_dispatch.c
> index 8b031f6e963f..eee41d10ad63 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/nebula-matrix/nbl/nbl_core/nbl_dispatch.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/nebula-matrix/nbl/nbl_core/nbl_dispatch.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,396 @@
> #include <linux/pci.h>
> #include "nbl_dispatch.h"
>
> +static u16 nbl_disp_chan_get_vsi_id_req(struct nbl_dispatch_mgt *disp_mgt,
> + u16 func_id, u16 type)
> +{
> + struct nbl_channel_ops *chan_ops = disp_mgt->chan_ops_tbl->ops;
> + struct nbl_common_info *common = disp_mgt->common;
> + struct nbl_chan_param_get_vsi_id result = { 0 };
> + struct nbl_chan_param_get_vsi_id param = { 0 };
> + struct nbl_chan_send_info chan_send;
> +
> + param.type = type;
> +
> + NBL_CHAN_SEND(chan_send, common->mgt_pf, NBL_CHAN_MSG_GET_VSI_ID,
> + &param, sizeof(param), &result, sizeof(result), 1);
> + chan_ops->send_msg(disp_mgt->chan_ops_tbl->priv, &chan_send);
> +
> + return result.vsi_id;
> +}

Does nbl_disp_chan_get_vsi_id_req() ignore the func_id parameter?

The function accepts func_id but only sends param.type in the channel
message. The nbl_chan_param_get_vsi_id struct appears to have only
{vsi_id, type} fields, with no func_id field.

On the responder side:

> +static void nbl_disp_chan_get_vsi_id_resp(void *priv, u16 src_id, u16 msg_id,
> + void *data, u32 data_len)
> +{
> + struct nbl_dispatch_mgt *disp_mgt = (struct nbl_dispatch_mgt *)priv;
> + struct nbl_channel_ops *chan_ops = disp_mgt->chan_ops_tbl->ops;
> + struct nbl_resource_ops *res_ops = disp_mgt->res_ops_tbl->ops;
> + struct nbl_resource_mgt *p = disp_mgt->res_ops_tbl->priv;
> + struct device *dev = disp_mgt->common->dev;
> + struct nbl_chan_param_get_vsi_id *param;
> + struct nbl_chan_param_get_vsi_id result = { 0 };
> + struct nbl_chan_ack_info chan_ack;
> + int err = NBL_CHAN_RESP_OK;
> + int ret;
> +
> + param = (struct nbl_chan_param_get_vsi_id *)data;
> +
> + result.vsi_id =
> + NBL_OPS_CALL_RET(res_ops->get_vsi_id, (p, src_id, param->type));

nbl_disp_chan_get_vsi_id_resp() uses src_id (the channel source) instead
of func_id. This creates a behavioral inconsistency with the direct path:

> +static u16 nbl_disp_get_vsi_id(struct nbl_dispatch_mgt *disp_mgt, u16 func_id,
> + u16 type)
> +{
> + struct nbl_resource_ops *res_ops = disp_mgt->res_ops_tbl->ops;
> + struct nbl_resource_mgt *p = disp_mgt->res_ops_tbl->priv;
> +
> + return NBL_OPS_CALL_RET(res_ops->get_vsi_id, (p, func_id, type));
> +}

The direct path correctly passes func_id to res_ops->get_vsi_id(p, func_id,
type).

When the channel path is active, callers cannot query VSI IDs for
functions other than the sender. Is the func_id parameter intended to be
used in nbl_disp_chan_get_vsi_id_req()?

[ ... ]