From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: mohsin.bashr@gmail.com
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, jacob.e.keller@intel.com,
davem@davemloft.net, sanman.p211993@gmail.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org, alexanderduyck@fb.com,
kernel-team@meta.com, edumazet@google.com, lee@trager.us
Subject: Re: [net-next,V0.5,4/5] eth: fbnic: Remove retry support
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 19:38:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260114033814.1033266-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260112211925.2551576-5-mohsin.bashr@gmail.com>
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least pausible.
For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
eth: fbnic: Update RX mbox timeout value
This commit unifies timeout values for firmware mailbox completion waits
by introducing a wrapper function fbnic_mbx_wait_for_cmpl(). However,
there appear to be two regressions where the condition logic was
accidentally inverted.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.h
> index 1ecd777aaada..6b3fb163d381 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_fw.h
[ ... ]
> +static inline bool fbnic_mbx_wait_for_cmpl(struct fbnic_fw_completion *cmpl)
> +{
> + return wait_for_completion_timeout(&cmpl->done,
> + FBNIC_MBX_RX_TO_SEC * HZ);
> +}
The wrapper returns the same value as wait_for_completion_timeout():
non-zero on success, zero on timeout.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_devlink.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_devlink.c
> index b62b1d5b1453..193f554717b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_devlink.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/meta/fbnic/fbnic_devlink.c
> @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ fbnic_flash_start(struct fbnic_dev *fbd, struct pldmfw_component *component)
> goto cmpl_free;
>
> /* Wait for firmware to ack firmware upgrade start */
> - if (wait_for_completion_timeout(&cmpl->done, 10 * HZ))
> + if (!fbnic_mbx_wait_for_cmpl(cmpl))
> err = cmpl->result;
> else
> err = -ETIMEDOUT;
Was the negation here intentional? The original code sets err to
cmpl->result when the completion succeeds (wait returns non-zero). With
the added negation, it now sets err to cmpl->result when the wait times
out (returns zero), and sets err to -ETIMEDOUT when the wait succeeds.
This appears to invert the success and timeout handling.
[ ... ]
> @@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ static int fbnic_fw_reporter_dump(struct devlink_health_reporter *reporter,
> goto cmpl_cleanup;
> }
>
> - if (wait_for_completion_timeout(&fw_cmpl->done, 2 * HZ)) {
> + if (!fbnic_mbx_wait_for_cmpl(fw_cmpl)) {
> reinit_completion(&fw_cmpl->done);
> } else {
> NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(extack,
> "Timed out waiting on core dump (%d/%d)",
Similarly here, the original code calls reinit_completion() when the wait
succeeds (to prepare for the next iteration), and reports "Timed out" in
the else branch when it fails. With the negation added, reinit_completion()
is now called on timeout, and the "Timed out" error message is reported
when the wait actually succeeds. Should the negation be removed from this
call site as well?
--
pw-bot: cr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-14 3:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-12 21:19 [PATCH net-next V0.5 0/5] eth: fbnic: Update IPC mailbox support Mohsin Bashir
2026-01-12 21:19 ` [PATCH net-next V0.5 1/5] eth: fbnic: Use GFP_KERNEL to allocting mbx pages Mohsin Bashir
2026-01-12 21:19 ` [PATCH net-next V0.5 2/5] eth: fbnic: Allocate all pages for RX mailbox Mohsin Bashir
2026-01-12 21:19 ` [PATCH net-next V0.5 3/5] eth: fbnic: Reuse RX mailbox pages Mohsin Bashir
2026-01-12 21:19 ` [PATCH net-next V0.5 4/5] eth: fbnic: Remove retry support Mohsin Bashir
2026-01-14 3:38 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-01-12 21:19 ` [PATCH net-next V0.5 5/5] eth: fbnic: Update RX mbox timeout value Mohsin Bashir
2026-01-14 3:38 ` [net-next,V0.5,5/5] " Jakub Kicinski
2026-01-12 21:55 ` [PATCH net-next V0.5 0/5] eth: fbnic: Update IPC mailbox support Mohsin Bashir
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260114033814.1033266-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=alexanderduyck@fb.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=lee@trager.us \
--cc=mohsin.bashr@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sanman.p211993@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox