On 12/12/24 17:30, Simon Horman wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 02:26:36PM +0100, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
Fix &ice_parser_rt::bst_key size. It was wrongly set to 10 instead of 20
in the initial impl commit (see Fixes tag). All usage code assumed it was
of size 20. That was also the initial size present up to v2 of the intro
series [2], but halved by v3 [3] refactor described as "Replace magic
hardcoded values with macros." The introducing series was so big that
some ugliness was unnoticed, same for bugs :/
ICE_BST_KEY_TCAM_SIZE and ICE_BST_TCAM_KEY_SIZE were differing by one.
There was tmp variable @j in the scope of edited function, but was not
used in all places. This ugliness is now gone.
I'm moving ice_parser_rt::pg_prio a few positions up, to fill up one of
the holes in order to compensate for the added 10 bytes to the ::bst_key,
resulting in the same size of the whole as prior to the fix, and miminal
changes in the offsets of the fields.
This fix obsoletes Ahmed's attempt at [1].
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/intel-wired-lan/[email protected]
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/intel-wired-lan/[email protected]
[3]
https://lore.kernel.org/intel-wired-lan/[email protected]
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
Closes:
https://lore.kernel.org/intel-wired-lan/[email protected]
Fixes: 9a4c07aaa0f5 ("ice: add parser execution main loop")
CC: Ahmed Zaki <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Larysa Zaremba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Przemek Kitszel <[email protected]>
Hi Przemek,
I agree that these changes are good. But I wonder if it would be best to
only treat the update size of bst_key as a fix.
I was also wondering, to the point that my first version was with
all 20 key bytes debug-printed in the exact way as it was prior to the
patch. Would be fine to just drop the printing part?
...
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_parser_rt.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_parser_rt.c
index dedf5e854e4b..d9c38ce27e4f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_parser_rt.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_parser_rt.c
@@ -125,22 +125,20 @@ static void ice_bst_key_init(struct ice_parser_rt *rt,
else
key[idd] = imem->b_kb.prio;
- idd = ICE_BST_KEY_TCAM_SIZE - 1;
+ idd = ICE_BST_TCAM_KEY_SIZE - 2;
for (i = idd; i >= 0; i--) {
int j;
j = ho + idd - i;
if (j < ICE_PARSER_MAX_PKT_LEN)
- key[i] = rt->pkt_buf[ho + idd - i];
+ key[i] = rt->pkt_buf[j];
else
key[i] = 0;
}
- ice_debug(rt->psr->hw, ICE_DBG_PARSER, "Generated Boost TCAM Key:\n");
- ice_debug(rt->psr->hw, ICE_DBG_PARSER, "%02X %02X %02X %02X %02X %02X %02X
%02X %02X %02X\n",
- key[0], key[1], key[2], key[3], key[4],
- key[5], key[6], key[7], key[8], key[9]);
- ice_debug(rt->psr->hw, ICE_DBG_PARSER, "\n");
+ ice_debug_array_w_prefix(rt->psr->hw, ICE_DBG_PARSER,
+ KBUILD_MODNAME "Generated Boost TCAM Key",
Should there be a delimeter between KBUILD_MODNAME and "Generated ..." ?
e.g.:
thank you :)
KBUILD_MODNAME ": Generated Boost TCAM Key",
+ key, ICE_BST_TCAM_KEY_SIZE);
}
static u16 ice_bit_rev_u16(u16 v, int len)
base-commit: 51a00be6a0994da2ba6b4ace3b7a0d9373b4b25e
--
2.46.0
