Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v3] ixgbe: preserve RSS indirection table across admin down/up

[Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>]

>>>>> +	if (adapter->last_rss_indices != rss_i ||
>>>>> +	    adapter->last_reta_entries != reta_entries) {
>>>>> +		for (i = 0; i < reta_entries; i++)
>>>>> +			adapter->rss_indir_tbl[i] = i % rss_i;
>>>> Are you sure rss_i never ever can be a 0?
>>>> This is the only thing I'm worrying about.
>>>
>>> Oops, you're exactly right. Good catch!
>>>
>>> I see the original code assigns 0 to rss_indir_tbl[i] when rss_i is
>> 0,
>>> like:
>>>   adapter->rss_indir_tbl[i] = 0;
>>
>> Ahh, that's not true, my brain was not working... Sorry for messing
>> up.
>> Anyway, in a situation where rss_i == 0, we should handle it somehow
>> to avoid zero-divisor.
>>
>>>
>>> To handle this with keeping the behavior when rss_i == 0, I'm
>>> considering Option 1:
>>>   adapter->rss_indir_tbl[i] = rss_i ? i % rss_i : 0;
>>>
>>> Option 2:
>>>   if (rss_i)
>>>       for (i = 0; i < reta_entries; i++)
>>>           adapter->rss_indir_tbl[i] = i % rss_i;
>>>   else
>>>       memset(adapter->rss_indir_tbl, 0, reta_entries);
>>>
>>> Since this is not in the data path, the overhead of checking rss_i in
>>> each iteration might be acceptable. Therefore I'd like to adopt the
>>> option 1 for simplicity.
>>>
>>> Do you have any preference or other suggestions?
> 
> I lean toward option 2, as the explicit if (rss_i) guard makes the logic clearer and easier to follow.
> 
> Handling the simplified case first with:
> if (unlikely(!rss_i))
>      memset(adapter->rss_indir_tbl, 0, reta_entries);
> else
>      for (i = 0; i < reta_entries; i++)
>          adapter->rss_indir_tbl[i] = i % rss_i;
> 
> Improves readability and separates the edge case from the main logic.
> 
> While it's possible to use a ternary expression like adapter->rss_indir_tbl[i] = rss_i ? i % rss_i : 0;,
> I find the conditional block more maintainable, especially if this logic evolves later.
> 
> Regarding unlikely(), unless there's profiling data showing a performance benefit,
> I'd avoid it here - this isn't in the fast path, and clarity should take precedence.
> With the best regards Alex

I would make it even simpler (than if/else paths):

if (!rss_i)
	rss_i = 1;

(which looks better than "should be obvious" oneliner, rss_i += !rss_i;)