From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: mmc@linux.ibm.com
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, nnac123@linux.ibm.com,
maddy@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, haren@linux.ibm.com,
ricklind@linux.ibm.com, davemarq@linux.ibm.com,
bjking1@linux.ibm.com, shaik.abdulla1@ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 12/15] ibmveth: Report MQ-aware RX counts in ethtool get_channels
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 18:47:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260818014735.3854400-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260814073642.24630-13-mmc@linux.ibm.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.
---
ibmveth: Report MQ-aware RX counts in ethtool get_channels
The patch changes ibmveth_get_channels() to report max_rx as
IBMVETH_MAX_RX_QUEUES when the adapter has multi-queue firmware support
(else 1), and to report rx_count from the driver's published
num_rx_queues instead of netdev->real_num_rx_queues.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmveth.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmveth.c
> index 3202b657c9b8f..5d4ca4b3d3d07 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmveth.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmveth.c
> @@ -2522,11 +2522,16 @@ static void ibmveth_get_ethtool_stats(struct net_device *dev,
> static void ibmveth_get_channels(struct net_device *netdev,
> struct ethtool_channels *channels)
> {
> + struct ibmveth_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
> +
> channels->max_tx = ibmveth_real_max_tx_queues();
> channels->tx_count = netdev->real_num_tx_queues;
>
> - channels->max_rx = netdev->real_num_rx_queues;
> - channels->rx_count = netdev->real_num_rx_queues;
> + if (adapter->multi_queue)
> + channels->max_rx = IBMVETH_MAX_RX_QUEUES;
> + else
> + channels->max_rx = 1;
> + channels->rx_count = ibmveth_get_num_rx_queues(adapter);
> }
[Severity: Medium]
At this point in the series, does raising max_rx here make RX channel
requests silently succeed without changing anything?
ibmveth_set_channels() only derives its work from tx_count:
unsigned int old = netdev->real_num_tx_queues,
goal = channels->tx_count;
...
if (!(netdev->flags & IFF_UP))
return netif_set_real_num_tx_queues(netdev, goal);
channels->rx_count is never read there. The core validation in
ethtool_set_channels() only bounds the request by the driver-reported
maximum:
if (channels.rx_count > curr.max_rx ||
channels.tx_count > curr.max_tx ||
so with max_rx now 16, "ethtool -L ethX rx N" for any N in 1..16 that
differs from the current RX count passes validation, enters
ibmveth_set_channels() with tx_count unchanged, runs no LTB loop
iterations, and returns 0. The netlink path in ethnl_set_channels()
applies the same max_rx-only ceiling and maps the 0 return to success.
Before this change max_rx equalled real_num_rx_queues, so an increase was
rejected with -EINVAL by the core; afterwards it is accepted and ignored,
and "ethtool -l" still shows the old rx_count.
For the record, this appears to be resolved later in the same series: the
final patch "ibmveth: Wire ethtool set_channels to MQ RX queue resize"
makes ibmveth_set_channels() read channels->rx_count and apply it via
ibmveth_resize_rx_channels() with range validation of
1..IBMVETH_MAX_RX_QUEUES, so the get/set pair agrees at the end of the
series. Would it be worth ordering that patch before this one, or
mentioning the intermediate state in the changelog?
[Severity: Low]
A second, smaller point about the same lines: max_rx is derived only from
adapter->multi_queue and does not consult adapter->mq_fallback. After
firmware refuses multi-queue, ibmveth_apply_mq_fallback() defers the
downgrade to the next open:
if (!adapter->mq_fallback)
return;
adapter->mq_fallback = false;
...
adapter->multi_queue = 0;
ibmveth_publish_num_rx_queues(adapter, 1);
so between the firmware rejection and the next open, "ethtool -l" keeps
reporting max_rx = 16 and rx_count = 8 while the adapter is going to run
single-queue. Should get_channels() also take mq_fallback into account?
Also, at this patch the reported maximum of IBMVETH_MAX_RX_QUEUES (16) is
above anything the driver publishes, since ibmveth_probe() caps the RX
queue count:
adapter->multi_queue = 1;
ibmveth_publish_num_rx_queues(adapter,
min(num_online_cpus(),
IBMVETH_DEFAULT_QUEUES));
The end-of-series patch "ibmveth: Wire ethtool set_channels to MQ RX
queue resize" does make 1..IBMVETH_MAX_RX_QUEUES genuinely settable via
ibmveth_resize_rx_channels(), so this is only about the intermediate
state and the stale reporting while mq_fallback is latched.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-18 1:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-14 7:36 [PATCH net-next v5 00/15] ibmveth: Add multi-queue RX support Mingming Cao
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 01/15] ibmveth: Add MQ RX hypercall wrappers and call definitions Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 02/15] ibmveth: Prepare MQ RX adapter data structures Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 03/15] ibmveth: Refactor RX resource allocation for MQ RX bring-up Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 04/15] ibmveth: Refactor buffer pool management for per-queue MQ RX Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 05/15] ibmveth: Refactor RX interrupt control for MQ RX queues Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 06/15] ibmveth: Refactor TX resource allocation in open/close paths Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 07/15] ibmveth: Add RX queue register helpers for MQ Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 08/15] ibmveth: Add queue-aware RX buffer submit helper " Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 09/15] ibmveth: Harden RX poll path with helpers Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 10/15] ibmveth: Enable multi-queue RX receive path Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 11/15] ibmveth: Add per-queue RX and TX statistics collection Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 12/15] ibmveth: Report MQ-aware RX counts in ethtool get_channels Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 13/15] ibmveth: Expose per-queue buffer pool details via debugfs Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 14/15] ibmveth: Implement incremental MQ RX queue resize Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-08-14 7:36 ` [PATCH net-next v5 15/15] ibmveth: Wire ethtool set_channels to " Mingming Cao
2026-08-18 1:47 ` 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=20260818014735.3854400-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=bjking1@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=davemarq@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=haren@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mmc@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nnac123@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=ricklind@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=shaik.abdulla1@ibm.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