Thread (27 messages) 27 messages, 3 authors, 2021-09-29

Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 05/11] RDMA/counter: Add optional counter support

From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Date: 2021-09-27 17:03:31
Also in: lkml, netdev

On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 02:07:24AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
 
+int rdma_counter_modify(struct ib_device *dev, u32 port, int index, bool enable)
+{
+	struct rdma_hw_stats *stats;
+	int ret;
+
+	if (!dev->ops.modify_hw_stat)
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
+	stats = ib_get_hw_stats_port(dev, port);
+	if (!stats)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	mutex_lock(&stats->lock);
+	ret = dev->ops.modify_hw_stat(dev, port, index, enable);
+	if (!ret)
+		enable ? clear_bit(index, stats->is_disabled) :
+			set_bit(index, stats->is_disabled);
This is not a kernel coding style write out the if, use success
oriented flow

Also, shouldn't this logic protect the driver from being called on
non-optional counters?
 	for (i = 0; i < data->stats->num_counters; i++) {
-		attr = &data->attrs[i];
+		if (data->stats->descs[i].flags & IB_STAT_FLAG_OPTIONAL)
+			continue;
+		attr = &data->attrs[pos];
 		sysfs_attr_init(&attr->attr.attr);
 		attr->attr.attr.name = data->stats->descs[i].name;
 		attr->attr.attr.mode = 0444;
 		attr->attr.show = hw_stat_device_show;
 		attr->show = show_hw_stats;
-		data->group.attrs[i] = &attr->attr.attr;
+		data->group.attrs[pos] = &attr->attr.attr;
+		pos++;
 	}
This isn't OK, the hw_stat_device_show() computes the stat index like
this:

	return stat_attr->show(ibdev, ibdev->hw_stats_data->stats,
			       stat_attr - ibdev->hw_stats_data->attrs, 0, buf);

Which assumes the stats are packed contiguously. This only works
because mlx5 is always putting the optional stats at the end.
 /**
  * struct rdma_stat_desc
  * @name - The name of the counter
- *
+ * @flags - Flags of the counter; For example, IB_STAT_FLAG_OPTIONAL
  */
The previous patch shouldn't have had the extra blank line then?

  
+int rdma_counter_modify(struct ib_device *dev, u32 port, int index,
+			bool is_add);
index should be unsigned int

The bool is called 'is_add' here but the implementation is 'enable' ?

Jason
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help