This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
Full review at:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=3
---
ice: support RDMA on 4+-port E830 devices
This patch updates the ice driver to support RDMA on E830 devices configured
with more than 4 ports. It modifies the port limit check to skip disabling
RDMA capabilities for E830 hardware.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> index 04633103e3e61..d85ae6d1c309a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c
> @@ -2510,7 +2510,7 @@ ice_recalc_port_limited_caps(struct ice_hw *hw, struct
> ice_hw_common_caps *caps)
> caps->maxtc = 4;
> ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "reducing maxtc to %d (based on
> #ports)\n",
> caps->maxtc);
> - if (caps->rdma) {
> + if (caps->rdma && hw->mac_type != ICE_MAC_E830) {
> ice_debug(hw, ICE_DBG_INIT, "forcing RDMA off\n");
> caps->rdma = 0;
> }
[Severity: Medium]
Will this still log an inaccurate warning for E830 devices?
While this patch successfully preserves the RDMA capability for E830 hardware
with more than 4 ports, the code immediately following this block in
ice_recalc_port_limited_caps() remains:
/* print message only when processing device capabilities
* during initialization.
*/
if (caps == &hw->dev_caps.common_cap)
dev_info(ice_hw_to_dev(hw), "RDMA functionality is not
available with the current device configuration.\n");
Because hw->dev_caps.num_funcs > 4 is true, will E830 devices incorrectly
trigger this warning during initialization even though RDMA remains enabled?
