re: sfc: process RX event inner checksum flags

re: sfc: process RX event inner checksum flags

[Colin Ian King]

Hi there,


not sure if this is a bug, or intentional, but CoverityScan picked up a
mismatch in arguments when calling efx_ef10_handle_rx_event_error() with
commit "sfc: process RX event inner checksum flags" that landed in
linux-next:

  CID 1402067 (#1 of 1): Arguments in wrong order
(SWAPPED_ARGUMENTS)swapped_arguments: The positions of arguments in the
call to efx_ef10_handle_rx_event_errors do not match the ordering of the
parameters:

    rx_l3_class is passed to rx_encap_hdr
    rx_l4_class is passed to rx_l3_class
    rx_encap_hdr is passed to rx_l4_class


The function in question has the prototype:

static u16 efx_ef10_handle_rx_event_errors(struct efx_channel *channel,
                                          unsigned int n_packets,
                                          unsigned int rx_encap_hdr,
                                          unsigned int rx_l3_class,
                                          unsigned int rx_l4_class,
                                          const efx_qword_t *event)

...where as it it being called using:

flags |= efx_ef10_handle_rx_event_errors(channel, n_packets,
rx_l3_class, rx_l4_class, rx_encap_hdr, event);

Is this a bug or intentional?

Colin

Re: sfc: process RX event inner checksum flags

[Edward Cree]

On 10/02/17 16:14, Colin Ian King wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>
> not sure if this is a bug, or intentional, but CoverityScan picked up a
> mismatch in arguments when calling efx_ef10_handle_rx_event_error() with
> commit "sfc: process RX event inner checksum flags"

It's a bug, thanks for the catch (and thanks Coverity as well).

Will send a patch shortly.

-Ed