From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com (mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com [67.231.148.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 007573043D5; Mon, 11 May 2026 02:45:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=67.231.148.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778467514; cv=none; b=f7Vrh8DWxuvRJxwQstfnKh2Z785VSqScJcHbcgq8RVSFDMUhPL0lplGnX2l+CTz+OUAcUXsopXcEiq0iWSfl3F4hKdbHV4kWJJQqyQHW0w8I5zlb0i8H5KsNKC7MDLTnFe8Us6VkMaqRRNgb2cHAqYEZHV/KTKOI1MX2RmXtD6E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778467514; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uDBGpNXR7xfRIM9KaaQyUSl/DTnHJD0R4Q6E5syiWts=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=HMyO1JxvqUEHSZp1/Au5cXFgUZPPaGRrFvt5WRThqz61+Ssh2HL4hJJAV6Y5z+O5kUfU0qqokSKVW0pzdyHxNtiHnZsrUKtbwYlmFEyzpVoz1bHw2QRXb/GHGofwGYJk3SWt2il8Ul4RiQk2Es0yCRtw+9aOjDf1KQc7pwpFQCI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=marvell.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=marvell.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=marvell.com header.i=@marvell.com header.b=DAuzAf/f; arc=none smtp.client-ip=67.231.148.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=marvell.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=marvell.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=marvell.com header.i=@marvell.com header.b="DAuzAf/f" Received: from pps.filterd (m0045849.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 64ALxVgx2886655; Sun, 10 May 2026 19:44:34 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=marvell.com; h= cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to; s=pfpt0220; bh=TCZGVfP3PrygTPQur+dOCeAnW SnlOU1PSYLbzVz6oog=; b=DAuzAf/fA+i+JrocE+oizKuLJFWYUn5VYzKQatIJv NQJ6lgOCmIMllRbzNQQNBSQ2l4cK9BXg0CSYVHpa0ktDtWIg5U0JgC9/JwwsAl6E ng4rV0aAv/Tv7r1OY5y3KQLFkQaHosQ6ujK8zffgotGTpk7c27BGMyXBQwFFdbHh KmBGM6B0JongvK3KEPdwE5k9XtphT03VvoTh+D0csJnNHyjbjwdehuuhUjXuUl8X 3Libo5zoZuIxzJwIbkMnvosUgtxtnfDohSsK6yPKw8YjrgyW3vsV09oCHKoYo4sl NGWcgwh6cZxCarSjhLFh/Qi3h/EJ/RFUM24tZoXrgQ22w== Received: from dc6wp-exch02.marvell.com ([4.21.29.225]) by mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4e229jkf6e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 10 May 2026 19:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DC6WP-EXCH02.marvell.com (10.76.176.209) by DC6WP-EXCH02.marvell.com (10.76.176.209) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.25; Sun, 10 May 2026 19:44:33 -0700 Received: from maili.marvell.com (10.69.176.80) by DC6WP-EXCH02.marvell.com (10.76.176.209) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.2.1544.25 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 10 May 2026 19:44:32 -0700 Received: from rkannoth-OptiPlex-7090 (unknown [10.28.36.165]) by maili.marvell.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 818CF3F7088; Sun, 10 May 2026 19:44:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 08:14:22 +0530 From: Ratheesh Kannoth To: , , , , CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 net-next 6/9] octeontx2: cn20k: Coordinate default rules with NIX LF lifecycle Message-ID: References: <20260508034912.4082520-1-rkannoth@marvell.com> <20260508034912.4082520-7-rkannoth@marvell.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260508034912.4082520-7-rkannoth@marvell.com> X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYwNTExMDAyNyBTYWx0ZWRfX1qoSKKDXVfQe d/r/S0T94RPFTYaLXpKupzlTPMGqs3OgPqAvfOCm6SjnHKX9Wd6Y6fzU3Af1hass93NXqIIp2XT mRvXGGZM5JjKrm7FUPuIJBYS+enYINIQYRD3NNehYCxSThZ/3tHDzxhoXtUHmP4S+Uo7Zo8pIw9 svxyFgkJzcEXCQNEmW/VUWWr1QGbve7sN1zBYu8WeRMRnZG3Dduo/Yy5esTZJR/4lfXtwTq9/85 Tep1WJ/sz3df/bSOqhmcy5dqxk7U2YcYwcqklx/Q2jGm0R2tpg3fhugD2YKU2U7s4F121FGyZaj pl3Y3zYXN0mwRdO6c1c4rICqH63oQSO3BGMjMGrXJ9hMV6YF7JvX8Wq3OIvjqsc76swLRkewVJs ue3l9V4Hb3XY6g4GSeH7SI+vsHHSKOYWd7pv4AXX1uuZRiyvxzfjhsG2vuwM5AdAtKrWkEez5Pm aveea3RoCkHHYLimLaw== X-Proofpoint-GUID: oIDeRa2Cm1H1BBu9O7kBRp-tgSNu22Ge X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: oIDeRa2Cm1H1BBu9O7kBRp-tgSNu22Ge X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=LdAMLDfi c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6a014292 cx=c_pps a=gIfcoYsirJbf48DBMSPrZA==:117 a=gIfcoYsirJbf48DBMSPrZA==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=NGcC8JguVDcA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=l0iWHRpgs5sLHlkKQ1IR:22 a=EAYMVhzMl8SCOHhVQcBL:22 a=M5GUcnROAAAA:8 a=hBA3f-BUjflL6dYasosA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=OBjm3rFKGHvpk9ecZwUJ:22 a=Oh551-UHZqmTy8JkqTUo:22 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1143,Hydra:6.1.51,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-05-11_01,2026-05-08_02,2025-10-01_01 On 2026-05-08 at 09:19:09, Ratheesh Kannoth (rkannoth@marvell.com) wrote: > Add NIX_LF_DONT_FREE_DFT_IDXS so the PF can send NIX LF free during hw > reinit or teardown without the AF freeing CN20K default NPC rule indexes > while the driver still owns that state (otx2_init_hw_resources and > otx2_free_hw_resources). pw-bot: changes-requested >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_npc.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_npc.c >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_npc.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_npc.c >> @@ -990,7 +990,7 @@ void rvu_npc_install_allmulti_entry(struct rvu *rvu, u16 pcifunc, int nixlf, >> u16 vf_func; >> >> /* Only CGX PF/VF can add allmulticast entry */ >> - if (is_lbk_vf(rvu, pcifunc) && is_sdp_vf(rvu, pcifunc)) >> + if (is_lbk_vf(rvu, pcifunc) || is_sdp_vf(rvu, pcifunc)) >Is this logic change intended to be part of this commit? >The commit message focuses on coordinating default rules with the NIX LF >lifecycle, but this silently changes the condition from a logical AND to a >logical OR. While this appears to correctly fix a bug where the condition >could never be true (since a device cannot simultaneously be both an LBK VF >and an SDP VF), including an undocumented bug fix in a patch about a >different topic obscures the commit's intent. >Should this be split into a separate patch, or explicitly mentioned in the >commit message? ACK. This is a fix, i will post as seperate patch after this net-next series merged.