From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [v4 Patch 1/2] s2io: add dynamic LRO disable support
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 12:44:40 +0100
Message-ID: <1277207080.2091.2.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com>
References: <20100622085415.5566.22523.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, nhorman@redhat.com, sgruszka@redhat.com,
	herbert.xu@redhat.com, Ramkrishna.Vepa@exar.com,
	davem@davemloft.net
To: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:30399 "EHLO
	exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752714Ab0FVLoo (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:44:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20100622085415.5566.22523.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 04:50 -0400, Amerigo Wang wrote:
> This patch adds dynamic LRO diable support for s2io net driver.
> 
> (I don't have s2io card, so only did compiling test. Anyone who wants
> to test this is more than welcome.)
> 
> This is based on Neil's initial work, and heavily modified
> based on Ramkrishna's suggestions.
[...]
> +static int s2io_ethtool_set_flags(struct net_device *dev, u32 data)
> +{
> +	struct s2io_nic *sp = netdev_priv(dev);
> +	int rc = 0;
> +	int changed = 0;
> +
> +	if (data & ~ETH_FLAG_LRO)
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> +	if (data & ETH_FLAG_LRO) {
> +		if (lro_enable) {
> +			if (!(dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO)) {
> +				dev->features |= NETIF_F_LRO;
> +				changed = 1;
> +			}
> +		} else
> +			rc = -EOPNOTSUPP;

Should lro_enable=0 really prevent enabling it later?  This seems
unusual.

> +	} else if (dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO) {
> +		dev->features &= ~NETIF_F_LRO;
> +		changed = 1;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (changed && netif_running(dev)) {
> +		s2io_stop_all_tx_queue(sp);
> +		s2io_card_down(sp);
> +		sp->lro = dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO;
[...]

This means s2io_nic::lro and ring_info::lro can have the value
NETIF_F_LRO, where previously they would only have the value 0 or 1.  I
don't know whether this could be a problem, but the safe thing to do is
to coerce the value by writing !!(dev->features & NETIF_F_LRO).

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.