From: Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosario <hidden> Date: 2018-02-01 18:05:37
Older versions of VIOS servers do not send the firmware level in the VPD
buffer for the ibmvnic driver. Thus, not only the current message is mis-
leading but the firmware version in the ethtool will be NULL. Therefore,
this patch fixes the firmware string and its warning.
Fixes: 4e6759be28e4 ("ibmvnic: Feature implementation of VPD for the ibmvnic driver")
Signed-off-by: Desnes A. Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -3290,7 +3290,11 @@ static void handle_vpd_rsp(union ibmvnic_crq *crq,*/substr=strnstr(adapter->vpd->buff,"RM",adapter->vpd->len);if(!substr){-dev_info(dev,"No FW level provided by VPD\n");+dev_info(dev,"Warning - No FW level has been provided in the VPD buffer by the VIOS Server\n");+ptr=strncpy((char*)adapter->fw_version,"N/A",+3*sizeof(char));+if(!ptr)+dev_err(dev,"Failed to inform that firmware version is unavailable to the adapter\n");gotocomplete;}
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Date: 2018-02-01 19:59:42
From: Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 16:04:30 -0200
Older versions of VIOS servers do not send the firmware level in the VPD
buffer for the ibmvnic driver. Thus, not only the current message is mis-
leading but the firmware version in the ethtool will be NULL. Therefore,
this patch fixes the firmware string and its warning.
Fixes: 4e6759be28e4 ("ibmvnic: Feature implementation of VPD for the ibmvnic driver")
Signed-off-by: Desnes A. Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
Applied.
Please do not put empty lines between Fixes: and Signed-off-by: and other
tags, all tags are equal and are placed together in an uninterrupted
sequences of consequetive lines.
Thank you.
On 02/01/2018 10:04 AM, Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosario wrote:
quoted hunk
Older versions of VIOS servers do not send the firmware level in the VPD
buffer for the ibmvnic driver. Thus, not only the current message is mis-
leading but the firmware version in the ethtool will be NULL. Therefore,
this patch fixes the firmware string and its warning.
Fixes: 4e6759be28e4 ("ibmvnic: Feature implementation of VPD for the ibmvnic driver")
Signed-off-by: Desnes A. Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -3290,7 +3290,11 @@ static void handle_vpd_rsp(union ibmvnic_crq *crq,*/substr=strnstr(adapter->vpd->buff,"RM",adapter->vpd->len);if(!substr){-dev_info(dev,"No FW level provided by VPD\n");+dev_info(dev,"Warning - No FW level has been provided in the VPD buffer by the VIOS Server\n");+ptr=strncpy((char*)adapter->fw_version,"N/A",
Is "N/A" the right thing to report? Would something like "Unknown" or "Unreported" be better?
+ 3 * sizeof(char));
+ if (!ptr)
+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to inform that firmware version is unavailable to the adapter\n");
The sentence structure here seems awkward. I would probably just get rid of this error and this one later in the function.
dev_err(dev, "Failed to isolate FW level string\n");
Instead just check and report if adapter->fw_version == NULL in the complete: label section.
-Tyrel
From: Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosário <hidden> Date: 2018-02-02 14:34:34
Hello David,
Thank you for your review and the heads up about protocol.
On 02/01/2018 05:59 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 16:04:30 -0200
quoted
Older versions of VIOS servers do not send the firmware level in the VPD
buffer for the ibmvnic driver. Thus, not only the current message is mis-
leading but the firmware version in the ethtool will be NULL. Therefore,
this patch fixes the firmware string and its warning.
Fixes: 4e6759be28e4 ("ibmvnic: Feature implementation of VPD for the ibmvnic driver")
Signed-off-by: Desnes A. Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
Applied.
Please do not put empty lines between Fixes: and Signed-off-by: and other
tags, all tags are equal and are placed together in an uninterrupted
sequences of consequetive lines.
Thank you.
--
Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosário
------------------------------------------
Linux Developer - IBM / Brazil
M.Sc. in Electrical and Computer Engineering - UFRN
From: Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosário <hidden> Date: 2018-02-02 14:37:54
Hello Tyrel,
I concur with your observations, but since this patch has already been
merged, I'll address them in another patch.
Thank you for your review,
On 02/01/2018 07:02 PM, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
On 02/01/2018 10:04 AM, Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosario wrote:
quoted
Older versions of VIOS servers do not send the firmware level in the VPD
buffer for the ibmvnic driver. Thus, not only the current message is mis-
leading but the firmware version in the ethtool will be NULL. Therefore,
this patch fixes the firmware string and its warning.
Fixes: 4e6759be28e4 ("ibmvnic: Feature implementation of VPD for the ibmvnic driver")
Signed-off-by: Desnes A. Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -3290,7 +3290,11 @@ static void handle_vpd_rsp(union ibmvnic_crq *crq,*/substr=strnstr(adapter->vpd->buff,"RM",adapter->vpd->len);if(!substr){-dev_info(dev,"No FW level provided by VPD\n");+dev_info(dev,"Warning - No FW level has been provided in the VPD buffer by the VIOS Server\n");+ptr=strncpy((char*)adapter->fw_version,"N/A",
Is "N/A" the right thing to report? Would something like "Unknown" or "Unreported" be better?
quoted
+ 3 * sizeof(char));
+ if (!ptr)
+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to inform that firmware version is unavailable to the adapter\n");
The sentence structure here seems awkward. I would probably just get rid of this error and this one later in the function.
dev_err(dev, "Failed to isolate FW level string\n");
Instead just check and report if adapter->fw_version == NULL in the complete: label section.
-Tyrel
quoted
goto complete;
}
--
Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosário
------------------------------------------
Linux Developer - IBM / Brazil
M.Sc. in Electrical and Computer Engineering - UFRN
On 02/02/2018 06:37 AM, Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosário wrote:
Hello Tyrel,
I concur with your observations, but since this patch has already been merged, I'll address them in another patch.
Fair enough. I didn't realize David had already merged it till after I sent my review.
-Tyrel
Thank you for your review,
On 02/01/2018 07:02 PM, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
quoted
On 02/01/2018 10:04 AM, Desnes Augusto Nunes do Rosario wrote:
quoted
Older versions of VIOS servers do not send the firmware level in the VPD
buffer for the ibmvnic driver. Thus, not only the current message is mis-
leading but the firmware version in the ethtool will be NULL. Therefore,
this patch fixes the firmware string and its warning.
Fixes: 4e6759be28e4 ("ibmvnic: Feature implementation of VPD for the ibmvnic driver")
Signed-off-by: Desnes A. Nunes do Rosario <redacted>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
*/
substr = strnstr(adapter->vpd->buff, "RM", adapter->vpd->len);
if (!substr) {
- dev_info(dev, "No FW level provided by VPD\n");
+ dev_info(dev, "Warning - No FW level has been provided in the VPD buffer by the VIOS Server\n");
+ ptr = strncpy((char *)adapter->fw_version, "N/A",
Is "N/A" the right thing to report? Would something like "Unknown" or "Unreported" be better?
quoted
+ 3 * sizeof(char));
+ if (!ptr)
+ dev_err(dev, "Failed to inform that firmware version is unavailable to the adapter\n");
The sentence structure here seems awkward. I would probably just get rid of this error and this one later in the function.
dev_err(dev, "Failed to isolate FW level string\n");
Instead just check and report if adapter->fw_version == NULL in the complete: label section.
-Tyrel