From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-100.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-100.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 474D1197A93; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.100 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723215571; cv=none; b=rvjH2xHJ6rKwascpPQgMoQ34lQ+UTsTQV3VEQiJY6VR4pkAOZ5isyxK2epiWvVvCN3MUATAh9FSdhmw/a4XWNB/QfJtO1yjgDZ4vFvwyT7mu5KnhsDd4G1AWn9U4n/PCz7ECiopALi4jSNrdoxDrbgCPHX3pyv7L06tb7SQrzQ0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723215571; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uVLPqw+UvO4d3vl0+as7B8+tUGMM0+jq+RxNrUtEyYU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=apoyqj451ztM36WqrNWIK+1et021rWz5KE3y51ikA/DxFtzOvoFHaR8lKCYIzR4NCpWzovGC2pZKKc/lxX8vQFEUER3yR7MHwNo5e4us7ci9O2gQazNtMzKyiGRMGf2ZG2T+sezVmKoz5OnDIdDTf80FOkqd6/653SdyIABEgx0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=T02tbz0n; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.100 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="T02tbz0n" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1723215559; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=SHoLjYIreNAqMZT4TTmTcVAbo6cppGaJNj2SfOV7+po=; b=T02tbz0nS8Umz47R8o9elNywBpBVyVnfbSPQTwXcBHDo6GwgtfR85Q2QY7LMjZ/XE1Sp8gIifeRv80ukKq68a8e67zLXEv0pnFBPA5Nnp0F5LmaWfUb3wWPFkTHCUUeDgLfUGSR7aG3mxiHOdyJoRw74x4G/8oegStNC2jLs5j8= Received: from localhost(mailfrom:dust.li@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0WCQNTjO_1723215557) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Fri, 09 Aug 2024 22:59:18 +0800 Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:59:17 +0800 From: Dust Li To: Liu Jian , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: jgg@ziepe.ca, leon@kernel.org, zyjzyj2000@gmail.com, wenjia@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com, alibuda@linux.alibaba.com, tonylu@linux.alibaba.com, guwen@linux.alibaba.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] net/smc: use ib_device_get_netdev() helper to get netdev info Message-ID: <20240809145917.GB103152@linux.alibaba.com> Reply-To: dust.li@linux.alibaba.com References: <20240809083148.1989912-1-liujian56@huawei.com> <20240809083148.1989912-3-liujian56@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240809083148.1989912-3-liujian56@huawei.com> On 2024-08-09 16:31:46, Liu Jian wrote: >Currently, in the SMC protocol, network devices are obtained by calling >ib_device_ops.get_netdev(). But for some drivers, this callback function >is not implemented separately. Therefore, here I modified to use >ib_device_get_netdev() to get net_device. > >For rdma devices that do not implement ib_device_ops.get_netdev(), one of >the issues addressed is as follows: >before: >smcr device >Net-Dev IB-Dev IB-P IB-State Type Crit #Links PNET-ID > rxee 1 ACTIVE 0 No 0 > >after: >smcr device >Net-Dev IB-Dev IB-P IB-State Type Crit #Links PNET-ID >enp1s0f1 rxee 1 ACTIVE 0 No 0 > >Signed-off-by: Liu Jian >--- > net/smc/smc_ib.c | 8 +++----- > net/smc/smc_pnet.c | 6 +----- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/net/smc/smc_ib.c b/net/smc/smc_ib.c >index 9297dc20bfe2..382351ac9434 100644 >--- a/net/smc/smc_ib.c >+++ b/net/smc/smc_ib.c >@@ -899,9 +899,7 @@ static void smc_copy_netdev_ifindex(struct smc_ib_device *smcibdev, int port) > struct ib_device *ibdev = smcibdev->ibdev; > struct net_device *ndev; > >- if (!ibdev->ops.get_netdev) >- return; >- ndev = ibdev->ops.get_netdev(ibdev, port + 1); >+ ndev = ib_device_get_netdev(ibdev, port + 1); > if (ndev) { > smcibdev->ndev_ifidx[port] = ndev->ifindex; > dev_put(ndev); >@@ -921,9 +919,9 @@ void smc_ib_ndev_change(struct net_device *ndev, unsigned long event) > port_cnt = smcibdev->ibdev->phys_port_cnt; > for (i = 0; i < min_t(size_t, port_cnt, SMC_MAX_PORTS); i++) { > libdev = smcibdev->ibdev; >- if (!libdev->ops.get_netdev) >+ lndev = ib_device_get_netdev(libdev, i + 1); >+ if (!lndev) > continue; >- lndev = libdev->ops.get_netdev(libdev, i + 1); > dev_put(lndev); > if (lndev != ndev) > continue; >diff --git a/net/smc/smc_pnet.c b/net/smc/smc_pnet.c >index 2adb92b8c469..a55a697a48de 100644 >--- a/net/smc/smc_pnet.c >+++ b/net/smc/smc_pnet.c >@@ -1055,11 +1055,7 @@ static void smc_pnet_find_rdma_dev(struct net_device *netdev, > continue; > > for (i = 1; i <= SMC_MAX_PORTS; i++) { >- if (!rdma_is_port_valid(ibdev->ibdev, i)) >- continue; Why remove this check ? Best regard, Dust >- if (!ibdev->ibdev->ops.get_netdev) >- continue; >- ndev = ibdev->ibdev->ops.get_netdev(ibdev->ibdev, i); >+ ndev = ib_device_get_netdev(ibdev->ibdev, i); > if (!ndev) > continue; > dev_put(ndev); >-- >2.34.1 >