[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 04/10] igc: Refactor XDP rxq info registration

[Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@intel.com>]

Quoting Maciej Fijalkowski (2020-12-21 14:53:45)
> > @@ -460,9 +460,12 @@ int igc_setup_rx_resources(struct igc_ring *rx_ring)
> >       struct device *dev = rx_ring->dev;
> >       int size, desc_len, res;
> >  
> > -     res = igc_xdp_register_rxq_info(rx_ring);
> > -     if (res < 0)
> > +     res = xdp_rxq_info_reg(&rx_ring->xdp_rxq, ndev, rx_ring->queue_index,
> > +                            0);
> > +     if (res < 0) {
> > +             netdev_err(ndev, "Failed to register xdp rxq info\n");
> 
> Maybe print out q idx?

I'll add that.

> > @@ -536,6 +539,9 @@ static void igc_configure_rx_ring(struct igc_adapter *adapter,
> >       u32 srrctl = 0, rxdctl = 0;
> >       u64 rdba = ring->dma;
> >  
> > +     WARN_ON(xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(&ring->xdp_rxq,
> > +                                        MEM_TYPE_PAGE_SHARED, NULL));
> 
> You should do the unroll in case it fails just like it was done in
> igc_xdp_register_rxq_info.

This was inspired in ixgbe driver.

The only reason xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model() could fail here is if xdp_rxq
wasn't registered. However, this is very unlikely to happen since it is
registered in igc_setup_rx_resources() which is always called before
igc_configure_rx_ring(). The WARN_ON() macro is used just in case.

If we really want to unroll, we should propagate the error back in the call
chain, changing the returning type of igc_configure_rx_ring() as well as the
other functions in the call chain, so the unrolling is done in the proper
place.

IMO, such change isn't worth it. It seems like a lot of change to cover a case
that is never expected. WARN_ON() sound more suitable in those cases. Also,
ixgbe is around for quite some time and this doesn't seem to be an issue.