On 2/8/23 15:24, Lucero Palau, Alejandro wrote:

On 2/8/23 14:38, Jiri Pirko wrote:

quoted

Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:25:13PM CET, alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com wrote:

quoted

From: Alejandro Lucero <redacted>

[..]

quoted

+static int efx_devlink_info_get(struct devlink *devlink,
+				struct devlink_info_req *req,
+				struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
+{
+	struct efx_devlink *devlink_private = devlink_priv(devlink);
+	struct efx_nic *efx = devlink_private->efx;
+	int rc;
+
+	/* Several different MCDI commands are used. We report first error
+	 * through extack along with total number of errors. Specific error
+	 * information via system messages.

I think you forgot to remove this comment.

With this nit fixed, free free to add:
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <redacted>

I'll do.

Thanks

Just wondering if this single nit deserves a v7 or better to delay it as 
another patch.

We got another patchset for ef100 ready to be sent and we would prefer 
to not delay this one more than needed.

quoted

quoted

+	 */
+	rc = efx_devlink_info_board_cfg(efx, req);
+	if (rc) {
+		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Getting board info failed");
+		return rc;
+	}
+	rc = efx_devlink_info_stored_versions(efx, req);
+	if (rc) {
+		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Getting stored versions failed");
+		return rc;
+	}
+	rc = efx_devlink_info_running_versions(efx, req);
+	if (rc) {
+		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Getting running versions failed");
+		return rc;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+#endif

[..]