Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] virtio_net: Remove command data from control_buf

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 01:35:16PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 04:49:09PM -0500, Daniel Jurgens wrote:
> > Allocate memory for the data when it's used. Ideally the could be on the
> > stack, but we can't DMA stack memory. With this change only the header
> > and status memory are shared between commands, which will allow using a
> > tighter lock than RTNL.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Jurgens <danielj@nvidia.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>
> 
> ...
> 
> > @@ -3893,10 +3925,16 @@ static int virtnet_restore_up(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> >  
> >  static int virtnet_set_guest_offloads(struct virtnet_info *vi, u64 offloads)
> >  {
> > +	u64 *_offloads __free(kfree) = NULL;
> >  	struct scatterlist sg;
> > -	vi->ctrl->offloads = cpu_to_virtio64(vi->vdev, offloads);
> >  
> > -	sg_init_one(&sg, &vi->ctrl->offloads, sizeof(vi->ctrl->offloads));
> > +	_offloads = kzalloc(sizeof(*_offloads), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!_offloads)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +	*_offloads = cpu_to_virtio64(vi->vdev, offloads);
> 
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> There is a type mismatch between *_offloads and cpu_to_virtio64
> which is flagged by Sparse as follows:
> 
>  .../virtio_net.c:3978:20: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
>  .../virtio_net.c:3978:20:    expected unsigned long long [usertype]
>  .../virtio_net.c:3978:20:    got restricted __virtio64
> 
> I think this can be addressed by changing the type of *_offloads to
> __virtio64 *.


Yes pls, endian-ness is easier to get right 1st time than fix
afterwards.

> > +
> > +	sg_init_one(&sg, _offloads, sizeof(*_offloads));
> >  
> >  	if (!virtnet_send_command(vi, VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_GUEST_OFFLOADS,
> >  				  VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_GUEST_OFFLOADS_SET, &sg)) {
> > -- 
> > 2.42.0
> > 
> >