On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:55:03AM -0700, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 01:33:19PM +0200, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote:
> > Drop queue should also adjust their priority according the most specific
> > layer in the pattern they are matching to avoid dropping all the traffic.
> >
> > Fixes: 8086cf08b2f0 ("net/mlx5: handle RSS hash configuration in RSS flow")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranje...@6wind.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c | 8 ++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c
> > index 26cf593af..549ae6916 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c
> > @@ -1185,6 +1185,14 @@ priv_flow_convert(struct priv *priv,
> > parser->queue[HASH_RXQ_ETH].ibv_attr->priority =
> > attr->priority +
> > hash_rxq_init[parser->layer].flow_priority;
> > + } else if (parser->drop) {
>
> Isn't this condition redundant?
I reach a point that all this "drop" is redundant and could use the
Ethernet entry to store it, but in RC phases making a such huge change
is not easy.
> And the following could be more consistent (and readable) with the similar
> code
> above. But I'd leave it as your choice.
>
> if (parser->drop) {
> ...
> } else if (parser->queues_n == 1) {
> ...
> } else {
> ...
> }
Agreed.
Thanks,
--
Nélio Laranjeiro
6WIND
