From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: nikhil.rao@amd.com
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
brett.creeley@amd.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
eric.joyner@amd.com, Vamsi.Atluri@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] pds_core: add PLDM component info display
Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 16:44:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260520234434.567087-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260516-upstream_v2_clean-v2-4-7e0d66bf4020@amd.com>
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
---
pds_core: add PLDM component info display
This patch extends pdsc_dl_info_get() to report individual PLDM firmware
components (name, version, fixed/running/stored status) via devlink info
when the device identity is version 2 or newer, falling back to the
existing fw_list path otherwise.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/devlink.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/devlink.c
> index 7f44e1a8d4fd..95c3d2531ef1 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/devlink.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/devlink.c
> @@ -93,14 +93,78 @@ int pdsc_dl_flash_update(struct devlink *dl,
> return pdsc_firmware_update(pdsc, params, extack);
> }
>
> +static int pdsc_dl_report_component(struct devlink_info_req *req,
> + struct pds_core_fw_component_info *info)
> +{
> + enum devlink_info_version_type ver_type;
> + u16 flags = le16_to_cpu(info->flags);
> + char *ver = info->version;
> + char buf[32];
> +
> + ver_type = DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_TYPE_NONE;
> + snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "fw.%s", info->name);
> + if (flags & PDS_CORE_FW_COMPONENT_INFO_F_UPDATE_BY_NAME)
> + ver_type = DEVLINK_INFO_VERSION_TYPE_COMPONENT;
> +
> + if (flags & PDS_CORE_FW_COMPONENT_INFO_F_FIXED)
> + return devlink_info_version_fixed_put(req, buf, ver);
[Medium]
Are the FIXED, RUNNING and STARTUP flags meant to be mutually exclusive?
Looking at enum pds_core_component_info_flags, RUNNING, STARTUP, FIXED
and UPDATE_BY_NAME are independent bits. Returning immediately on
F_FIXED short-circuits the subsequent F_RUNNING and F_STARTUP checks,
so a fixed-but-running component (the natural case for goldfw / ROM
firmware that is currently executing) only surfaces as fixed.
The example in the commit message shows fw.goldfw under "running:":
versions:
running:
fw.goldfw 1.2.3
fw.mainfwa 1.2.4
fw.mainfwb 1.2.3
If goldfw has F_FIXED|F_RUNNING set, would the early return here cause
the running entry for fw.goldfw to be dropped, contradicting the
example output?
> +
> + if (flags & PDS_CORE_FW_COMPONENT_INFO_F_RUNNING) {
> + int err;
> +
> + err = devlink_info_version_running_put_ext(req, buf,
> + ver, ver_type);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + if (flags & PDS_CORE_FW_COMPONENT_INFO_F_STARTUP)
> + return devlink_info_version_stored_put_ext(req, buf,
> + ver, ver_type);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int pdsc_dl_component_info_get(struct devlink *dl,
> + struct devlink_info_req *req,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + struct pds_core_component_list_info *list_info;
> + struct pdsc *pdsc = devlink_priv(dl);
> + u8 num_components;
> + int err;
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!pdsc->fw_components.num_components) {
> + err = pdsc_get_component_info(pdsc);
> + if (err) {
> + dev_err(pdsc->dev, "Failed to get component_info %pe\n",
> + ERR_PTR(err));
> + return err;
> + }
> + }
[Medium, Medium]
Two questions about the cache-population logic here.
First, pdsc_get_component_info() handles the ver==0 firmware-incompat
case by emitting a dev_warn and returning 0 without populating
pdsc->fw_components.num_components:
drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pds_core/fw.c:pdsc_get_component_info() {
...
if (comp.get_component_info.ver == 0) {
dev_warn(pdsc->dev,
"Incompatible get_component_info version %u reported by firmware\n",
comp.get_component_info.ver);
err = 0;
goto out;
}
...
}
The cache-miss guard above checks num_components, which stays zero on
that firmware path. Will every devlink dev info invocation then re-run
the full PDS_CORE_CMD_GET_COMPONENT_INFO devcmd (a 4 KB kzalloc, a
dma_map_single/dma_unmap_single, a synchronous devcmd under
devcmd_lock with timeout devcmd_timeout * 2) and emit a fresh dev_warn
each time?
Second, is there a path that invalidates the cache after a successful
flash? pdsc_dl_flash_update() -> pdsc_firmware_update() ->
pdsc_pldm_firmware_update() / pdsc_legacy_firmware_update() does not
appear to clear pdsc->fw_components.num_components, and
pdsc_get_component_info() populates the info[] array in place. After a
flash, will subsequent devlink dev info calls keep showing the
pre-flash version strings until the driver is reloaded?
> +
> + list_info = &pdsc->fw_components;
> + num_components = min_t(u8, list_info->num_components,
> + le16_to_cpu(pdsc->dev_ident.max_fw_slots));
[Medium]
Is the type chosen for min_t() here correct?
max_fw_slots is __le16 in struct pds_core_dev_identity, so the wire
protocol allows values up to 65535, and min_t(u8, ...) casts both
operands to u8 before comparing.
For example, with max_fw_slots = 256, le16_to_cpu() yields 256, the
u8 cast turns it into 0, and the loop reports zero components even
when num_components is non-zero. With max_fw_slots = 257 only one
component would be reported, and so on.
Should this be min_t(u32, ...) (or similar wider type), or even just
list_info->num_components, given that pdsc_get_component_info()
already bounds num_components by PDS_CORE_FW_COMPONENT_LIST_LEN, the
actual size of list_info->info[]? Capping by max_fw_slots also seems
to silently drop valid entries when firmware reports more components
than slots.
> + for (i = 0; i < num_components; i++) {
> + err = pdsc_dl_report_component(req, &list_info->info[i]);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
[ ... ]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-20 23:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-29 8:28 [PATCH net-next 0/6] pds_core: Add PLDM firmware update and host backed memory support Nikhil P. Rao
2026-04-29 8:28 ` [PATCH net-next 1/6] pds_core: add support for quiet devcmd failures Nikhil P. Rao
2026-04-29 8:28 ` [PATCH net-next 2/6] pds_core: add support for identity version 2 Nikhil P. Rao
2026-04-29 8:28 ` [PATCH net-next 3/6] pds_core: add PLDM firmware update support via devlink flash Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-01 1:05 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-01 20:03 ` Rao, Nikhil
2026-04-29 8:28 ` [PATCH net-next 4/6] pds_core: add PLDM component info display Nikhil P. Rao
2026-04-29 8:28 ` [PATCH net-next 5/6] pds_core: add host backed memory support for firmware Nikhil P. Rao
2026-04-29 8:28 ` [PATCH net-next 6/6] pds_core: add debugfs support for host backed memory Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 0/6] PLDM Firmware Update Support for pds_core Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 1/6] pds_core: add support for quiet devcmd failures Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 2/6] pds_core: add support for identity version 2 Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-20 23:44 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 3/6] pds_core: add PLDM firmware update support via devlink flash Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-20 23:44 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] pds_core: add PLDM component info display Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-20 23:44 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-05-20 23:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 5/6] pds_core: add host backed memory support for firmware Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-20 23:44 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-16 2:42 ` [PATCH net-next v2 6/6] pds_core: add debugfs support for host backed memory Nikhil P. Rao
2026-05-20 23:44 ` Jakub Kicinski
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=20260520234434.567087-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=Vamsi.Atluri@amd.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=brett.creeley@amd.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.joyner@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikhil.rao@amd.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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