Hi David,

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 03:33:10PM -0800, David Miller wrote:

From: Vadim Lomovtsev <redacted>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 09:52:14 +0000

quoted

@@ -169,6 +169,20 @@ static int nicvf_check_pf_ready(struct nicvf *nic)
 	return 1;
 }
 
+static int nicvf_send_cfg_done(struct nicvf *nic)
+{
+	union nic_mbx mbx = {};
+
+	mbx.msg.msg = NIC_MBOX_MSG_CFG_DONE;
+	if (nicvf_send_msg_to_pf(nic, &mbx)) {
+		netdev_err(nic->netdev,
+			   "PF didn't respond to CFG DONE msg\n");
+		return 0;
+	}
+
+	return 1;
+}

 ...

quoted

@@ -1515,8 +1528,7 @@ int nicvf_open(struct net_device *netdev)
 		nicvf_enable_intr(nic, NICVF_INTR_RBDR, qidx);
 
 	/* Send VF config done msg to PF */
-	mbx.msg.msg = NIC_MBOX_MSG_CFG_DONE;
-	nicvf_write_to_mbx(nic, &mbx);
+	nicvf_send_cfg_done(nic);

If the one and only call site doesn't even bother to check the return
value, just make it return void.

Thanks.

Thank you for your time and comments.
I'll update patch and re-submit.

WBR,
Vadim
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel