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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66077C4167E for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 16:17:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232835AbiKGQRE (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2022 11:17:04 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40840 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232461AbiKGQRC (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2022 11:17:02 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3E606466; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1667837821; x=1699373821; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5CmWRdas0pQcgH+5XcFqoniBpxZT92/HEksRj+lSXd0=; b=ZI9OxNy+rxIqvPW9vM+8gOCQ2hZYlXLqoAHnjpyb0NSF/PST7bR2N9lG i8jSsfFHSs2EueyL698EqlfEerNe9RZcx66Yppi6g4Ghww9jbbj5Uty+k KgZJoSnkq4UQfZ82Mb6HtRBxplCXRfSnkutFucboDGCXgWvjjzCHgG86O RBjMgJ2E4WBRHZjsBPPRJn/VjgK6u9hRTc+XGys/FepSi9lmacGHWI+Cf 0EkKVmfXt6QuIj+i6AYmw2PuJHDP3XjLOPAKr1seNL+ZvNtPiZe03q/7+ I+L3XXdmvwrX+yG7fFzl2avtD383Z1nr51bUg1XgPrbh7Gww6wDPfxVj1 Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10524"; a="308074901" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,145,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="308074901" Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Nov 2022 08:17:01 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10524"; a="704933794" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,145,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="704933794" Received: from irvmail001.ir.intel.com ([10.43.11.63]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Nov 2022 08:16:58 -0800 Received: from newjersey.igk.intel.com (newjersey.igk.intel.com [10.102.20.203]) by irvmail001.ir.intel.com (8.14.3/8.13.6/MailSET/Hub) with ESMTP id 2A7GGvID021262; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 16:16:57 GMT From: Alexander Lobakin To: Horatiu Vultur Cc: Alexander Lobakin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, hawk@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/4] net: lan966x: Add basic XDP support Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2022 17:13:57 +0100 Message-Id: <20221107161357.556549-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.38.1 In-Reply-To: <20221106211154.3225784-4-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> References: <20221106211154.3225784-1-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> <20221106211154.3225784-4-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org From: Alexander Lobakin From: Horatiu Vultur Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2022 22:11:53 +0100 > Introduce basic XDP support to lan966x driver. Currently the driver > supports only the actions XDP_PASS, XDP_DROP and XDP_ABORTED. > > Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur > --- > .../net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/Makefile | 3 +- > .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_fdma.c | 11 ++- > .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c | 5 ++ > .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h | 13 +++ > .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_xdp.c | 81 +++++++++++++++++++ > 5 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_xdp.c [...] > +bool lan966x_xdp_port_present(struct lan966x_port *port) > +{ > + return !!port->xdp_prog; > +} Why uninline such a simple check? I realize you want to keep all XDP stuff inside in the separate file, but doesn't this one looks too much? > + > +int lan966x_xdp_port_init(struct lan966x_port *port) > +{ > + struct lan966x *lan966x = port->lan966x; > + > + return xdp_rxq_info_reg(&port->xdp_rxq, port->dev, 0, > + lan966x->napi.napi_id); > +} > + > +void lan966x_xdp_port_deinit(struct lan966x_port *port) > +{ > + if (xdp_rxq_info_is_reg(&port->xdp_rxq)) > + xdp_rxq_info_unreg(&port->xdp_rxq); > +} > -- > 2.38.0 Thanks, Olek