On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 07:44:54AM +0000, Srujana Challa wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 07:13:08PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > On Fri, 6 Feb 2026 17:31:54 +0530 Srujana Challa wrote:
> > > > Replace hardcoded RSS max key size limit with NETDEV_RSS_KEY_LEN to
> > > > align with kernel's standard RSS key length. Add validation for RSS
> > > > key size against spec minimum (40 bytes) and driver maximum. When
> > > > validation fails, gracefully disable RSS features and continue
> > > > initialization rather than failing completely.
> > >
> > > Hm, FWIW clang says:
> > >
> > > drivers/net/virtio_net.c:6841:31: warning: result of comparison of
> > > constant
> > 256 with expression of type 'u8' (aka 'unsigned char') is always false [-
> > Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare]
> > > 6841 | } else if (vi->rss_key_size >
> > > VIRTIO_NET_RSS_MAX_KEY_SIZE)
> > {
> > > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > Which is kinda annoying because the value was increased in net-next.
> > > If Machael wants this backported then we need to keep the check and
> > > follow up in net-next? We could try to cast the u32 away but that
> > > feels dirty..
> >
> >
> > I'd say yes. the warning is harmless.
> > so
> > patch 1 - this code
> > patch 2 - replace with BUILD_BUG_ON
> >
> > but i ask then whether this code was actually tested against net-next.
> Yes, tested against net-next (before NETDEV_RSS_KEY_LEN was changed to 256).
> BUILD_BUG_ON would always fail as-is on net-next since rss_key_size is u8.
BUILD_BUG_ON(type_max(vi->rss_key_size) >= VIRTIO_NET_RSS_MAX_KEY_SIZE)
why would it fail?
> Can we cast the comparison to u32 instead?
> Thanks!
>
> >
> > --
> > MST
>
forcing compiler to generate code where we do not need any
really seems silly.
--
MST
