From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7F1C61DA4 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:58:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230478AbjBBL6P (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:58:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43432 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230317AbjBBL6O (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2023 06:58:14 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x636.google.com (mail-ej1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::636]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C70A781B2F for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 03:58:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x636.google.com with SMTP id p26so5145697ejx.13 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 03:58:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=resnulli-us.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=XHd03EaZP6DjW/8NNdgr4Jpr+0g1ZBXkZZQEezfnDiM=; b=FHI0qLU2H0Nh4ZnYbAXdqsjfqdk/ZMXdKOzf9f4Mvy1f3Q1soCbf6HNJAtgRuR3GWQ 0Q+EgSyeiyfK+MOpLv7ePcP979MjyOiBGxUSIjId91h0MGVfApnlIALqipSmwMt1E21S uM0bDZCE4klYeDCekkPn1imCWtrqL7XGSGGHXDOT9RIh4sBhkXhzGm1v76gQwGYewMtP 43EiiWkcx8yavTOatq9LCSRKM/BCJnhFBI4JfE3n3nLcyGe9pJSbvGCydlKqAbVtpmvf ThQgw21p7kFcep9STa5LMgbvrsVCiXXr80ml/0JAga3NBchV4W8UaF2eN4a29icvUFNQ eY8w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=XHd03EaZP6DjW/8NNdgr4Jpr+0g1ZBXkZZQEezfnDiM=; b=kvP+NG6GxsoMqQwlBaFVXLC9JVDINcoeldyb0zqbTwUuWHFz31WNC7DWzL3JzFlTHc wWsiXOZwRw91OQQD5Rueixbvz+PkoBOTyPOOZRQDQD+oHWlZg2Wn87/4M009/G8SgmjO Bt8qlUQqo4gsczd0tFsRi/0fBT9qo5JnJmjJ3AQACwcj88ibZNu8fCoGpBUdsKTEmLL+ K52nolp5XH6KS/teezkNTLcQXmlwFzGS7iUDSmPuPejxCgCBmNiyPynEwWMfUhAqhsEt 5BPXkkDcpX5j2Rz0nXvm2Nb6nnDNzi5yFPzHYKYjl7XvZTR133fPnUwBz+xG4+We7P5G Xkow== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKX81Xwz7pcLawRB9SjjgLqwBlk5Vo8HeNkuLh/xq5jejAQTfa60 yOfo8IQ4/gibA2BEUcO5vGNAoA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+xYDvbozCI3Jbj6PipoF6DflbvjVUURUAT2U4ROXGrbWbvMXaUlZ8fiI8/aQwWtHNP6+MxIw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:d87:b0:888:db6b:5fa9 with SMTP id go7-20020a1709070d8700b00888db6b5fa9mr7127075ejc.67.1675339091235; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 03:58:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([86.61.181.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g9-20020a170906394900b00872a726783dsm11449071eje.217.2023.02.02.03.58.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 02 Feb 2023 03:58:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 12:58:09 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko To: alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@amd.com, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, habetsm.xilinx@gmail.com, ecree.xilinx@gmail.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, jiri@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 2/8] sfc: add devlink info support for ef100 Message-ID: References: <20230202111423.56831-1-alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com> <20230202111423.56831-3-alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230202111423.56831-3-alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 12:14:17PM CET, alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com wrote: >From: Alejandro Lucero > >Support for devlink info command. You are quite brief for couple hundred line patch. Care to shed some more details for the reader? Also, use imperative mood (applies to the rest of the pathes) [...] >+static int efx_devlink_info_get(struct devlink *devlink, >+ struct devlink_info_req *req, >+ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) >+{ >+ struct efx_devlink *devlink_private = devlink_priv(devlink); >+ struct efx_nic *efx = devlink_private->efx; >+ char msg[NETLINK_MAX_FMTMSG_LEN]; >+ int errors_reported = 0; >+ int rc; >+ >+ /* Several different MCDI commands are used. We report first error >+ * through extack along with total number of errors. Specific error >+ * information via system messages. >+ */ >+ rc = efx_devlink_info_board_cfg(efx, req); >+ if (rc) { >+ sprintf(msg, "Getting board info failed"); >+ errors_reported++; >+ } >+ rc = efx_devlink_info_stored_versions(efx, req); >+ if (rc) { >+ if (!errors_reported) >+ sprintf(msg, "Getting stored versions failed"); >+ errors_reported += rc; >+ } >+ rc = efx_devlink_info_running_versions(efx, req); >+ if (rc) { >+ if (!errors_reported) >+ sprintf(msg, "Getting board info failed"); >+ errors_reported++; Under which circumstances any of the errors above happen? Is it a common thing? Or is it result of some fatal event? You treat it like it is quite common, which seems very odd to me. If they are rare, just return error right away to the caller. >+ } >+ >+ if (errors_reported) >+ NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT(extack, >+ "%s. %d total errors. Check system messages", >+ msg, errors_reported); >+ return 0; >+} >+ > static const struct devlink_ops sfc_devlink_ops = { >+ .info_get = efx_devlink_info_get, > }; [...]