Re: [iwl-next v4 3/8] ice: get rid of num_lan_msix field

[Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>]

On 10/12/2024 8:13 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> + David Laight
> 
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 02:03:57PM +0200, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
>> Remove the field to allow having more queues than MSI-X on VSI. As
>> default the number will be the same, but if there won't be more MSI-X
>> available VSI can run with at least one MSI-X.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Wojciech Drewek <wojciech.drewek@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice.h         |  1 -
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_base.c    | 10 +++-----
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c |  8 +++---
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_irq.c     | 11 +++------
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c     | 26 +++++++++++---------
>>  5 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice.h
>> index cf824d041d5a..1e23aec2634f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice.h
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice.h
>> @@ -622,7 +622,6 @@ struct ice_pf {
>>  	u16 max_pf_txqs;	/* Total Tx queues PF wide */
>>  	u16 max_pf_rxqs;	/* Total Rx queues PF wide */
>>  	struct ice_pf_msix msix;
>> -	u16 num_lan_msix;	/* Total MSIX vectors for base driver */
>>  	u16 num_lan_tx;		/* num LAN Tx queues setup */
>>  	u16 num_lan_rx;		/* num LAN Rx queues setup */
>>  	u16 next_vsi;		/* Next free slot in pf->vsi[] - 0-based! */
> 
> ...
> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c
>> index 85a3b2326e7b..e5c56ec8bbda 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c
>> @@ -3811,8 +3811,8 @@ ice_get_ts_info(struct net_device *dev, struct kernel_ethtool_ts_info *info)
>>   */
>>  static int ice_get_max_txq(struct ice_pf *pf)
>>  {
>> -	return min3(pf->num_lan_msix, (u16)num_online_cpus(),
>> -		    (u16)pf->hw.func_caps.common_cap.num_txq);
>> +	return min_t(u16, num_online_cpus(),
>> +		     pf->hw.func_caps.common_cap.num_txq);
> 
> It is unclear why min_t() is used here or elsewhere in this patch
> instead of min() as it seems that all the entities being compared
> are unsigned. Are you concerned about overflowing u16? If so, perhaps
> clamp, or some error handling, is a better approach.
> 
> I am concerned that the casting that min_t() brings will hide
> any problems that may exist.
> 
Ya, I think min makes more sense. min_t was likely selected out of habit
or looking at other examples in the driver.