* [PATCH v2 for-next 1/9] RDMA/hns: Refactor process about opcode in post_send()
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-18 13:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 2/9] RDMA/hns: Add type check in get/set hw field Weihang Li
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
According to the IB specifications, the verbs should return an immediate
error when the users set an unsupported opcode. Furthermore, refactor codes
about opcode in process of post_send to make the difference between opcodes
clearer.
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 132 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 83 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index 96e08b4..7f6c707 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -292,6 +292,33 @@ static unsigned int calc_wr_sge_num(const struct ib_send_wr *wr,
return valid_num;
}
+static __le32 get_immtdata(const struct ib_send_wr *wr)
+{
+ switch (wr->opcode) {
+ case IB_WR_SEND_WITH_IMM:
+ case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE_WITH_IMM:
+ return cpu_to_le32(be32_to_cpu(wr->ex.imm_data));
+ default:
+ return 0;
+ }
+}
+
+static int set_ud_opcode(struct hns_roce_v2_ud_send_wqe *ud_sq_wqe,
+ const struct ib_send_wr *wr)
+{
+ u32 ib_op = wr->opcode;
+
+ if (ib_op != IB_WR_SEND && ib_op != IB_WR_SEND_WITH_IMM)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ ud_sq_wqe->immtdata = get_immtdata(wr);
+
+ roce_set_field(ud_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_UD_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OPCODE_M,
+ V2_UD_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OPCODE_S, to_hr_opcode(ib_op));
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static inline int set_ud_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp,
const struct ib_send_wr *wr,
void *wqe, unsigned int *sge_idx,
@@ -300,15 +327,24 @@ static inline int set_ud_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp,
struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev = to_hr_dev(qp->ibqp.device);
struct hns_roce_ah *ah = to_hr_ah(ud_wr(wr)->ah);
struct hns_roce_v2_ud_send_wqe *ud_sq_wqe = wqe;
+ struct ib_device *ibdev = &hr_dev->ib_dev;
unsigned int curr_idx = *sge_idx;
int valid_num_sge;
u32 msg_len = 0;
bool loopback;
u8 *smac;
+ int ret;
valid_num_sge = calc_wr_sge_num(wr, &msg_len);
memset(ud_sq_wqe, 0, sizeof(*ud_sq_wqe));
+ ret = set_ud_opcode(ud_sq_wqe, wr);
+ if (unlikely(ret)) {
+ ibdev_err(ibdev, "unsupported opcode, opcode = %d.\n",
+ wr->opcode);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
roce_set_field(ud_sq_wqe->dmac, V2_UD_SEND_WQE_DMAC_0_M,
V2_UD_SEND_WQE_DMAC_0_S, ah->av.mac[0]);
roce_set_field(ud_sq_wqe->dmac, V2_UD_SEND_WQE_DMAC_1_M,
@@ -336,16 +372,6 @@ static inline int set_ud_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp,
ud_sq_wqe->msg_len = cpu_to_le32(msg_len);
- switch (wr->opcode) {
- case IB_WR_SEND_WITH_IMM:
- case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE_WITH_IMM:
- ud_sq_wqe->immtdata = cpu_to_le32(be32_to_cpu(wr->ex.imm_data));
- break;
- default:
- ud_sq_wqe->immtdata = 0;
- break;
- }
-
/* Set sig attr */
roce_set_bit(ud_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_UD_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_CQE_S,
(wr->send_flags & IB_SEND_SIGNALED) ? 1 : 0);
@@ -402,33 +428,68 @@ static inline int set_ud_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp,
return 0;
}
+static int set_rc_opcode(struct hns_roce_v2_rc_send_wqe *rc_sq_wqe,
+ const struct ib_send_wr *wr)
+{
+ u32 ib_op = wr->opcode;
+
+ rc_sq_wqe->immtdata = get_immtdata(wr);
+
+ switch (ib_op) {
+ case IB_WR_RDMA_READ:
+ case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE:
+ case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE_WITH_IMM:
+ rc_sq_wqe->rkey = cpu_to_le32(rdma_wr(wr)->rkey);
+ rc_sq_wqe->va = cpu_to_le64(rdma_wr(wr)->remote_addr);
+ break;
+ case IB_WR_SEND:
+ case IB_WR_SEND_WITH_IMM:
+ break;
+ case IB_WR_ATOMIC_CMP_AND_SWP:
+ case IB_WR_ATOMIC_FETCH_AND_ADD:
+ rc_sq_wqe->rkey = cpu_to_le32(atomic_wr(wr)->rkey);
+ rc_sq_wqe->va = cpu_to_le64(atomic_wr(wr)->remote_addr);
+ break;
+ case IB_WR_REG_MR:
+ set_frmr_seg(rc_sq_wqe, reg_wr(wr));
+ break;
+ case IB_WR_LOCAL_INV:
+ roce_set_bit(rc_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_SO_S, 1);
+ fallthrough;
+ case IB_WR_SEND_WITH_INV:
+ rc_sq_wqe->inv_key = cpu_to_le32(wr->ex.invalidate_rkey);
+ break;
+ default:
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ roce_set_field(rc_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OPCODE_M,
+ V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OPCODE_S, to_hr_opcode(ib_op));
+
+ return 0;
+}
static inline int set_rc_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp,
const struct ib_send_wr *wr,
void *wqe, unsigned int *sge_idx,
unsigned int owner_bit)
{
+ struct ib_device *ibdev = &to_hr_dev(qp->ibqp.device)->ib_dev;
struct hns_roce_v2_rc_send_wqe *rc_sq_wqe = wqe;
unsigned int curr_idx = *sge_idx;
unsigned int valid_num_sge;
u32 msg_len = 0;
- int ret = 0;
+ int ret;
valid_num_sge = calc_wr_sge_num(wr, &msg_len);
memset(rc_sq_wqe, 0, sizeof(*rc_sq_wqe));
rc_sq_wqe->msg_len = cpu_to_le32(msg_len);
- switch (wr->opcode) {
- case IB_WR_SEND_WITH_IMM:
- case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE_WITH_IMM:
- rc_sq_wqe->immtdata = cpu_to_le32(be32_to_cpu(wr->ex.imm_data));
- break;
- case IB_WR_SEND_WITH_INV:
- rc_sq_wqe->inv_key = cpu_to_le32(wr->ex.invalidate_rkey);
- break;
- default:
- rc_sq_wqe->immtdata = 0;
- break;
+ ret = set_rc_opcode(rc_sq_wqe, wr);
+ if (unlikely(ret)) {
+ ibdev_err(ibdev, "unsupported opcode, opcode = %d.\n",
+ wr->opcode);
+ return ret;
}
roce_set_bit(rc_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_FENCE_S,
@@ -443,33 +504,6 @@ static inline int set_rc_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp,
roce_set_bit(rc_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OWNER_S,
owner_bit);
- switch (wr->opcode) {
- case IB_WR_RDMA_READ:
- case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE:
- case IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE_WITH_IMM:
- rc_sq_wqe->rkey = cpu_to_le32(rdma_wr(wr)->rkey);
- rc_sq_wqe->va = cpu_to_le64(rdma_wr(wr)->remote_addr);
- break;
- case IB_WR_LOCAL_INV:
- roce_set_bit(rc_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_SO_S, 1);
- rc_sq_wqe->inv_key = cpu_to_le32(wr->ex.invalidate_rkey);
- break;
- case IB_WR_REG_MR:
- set_frmr_seg(rc_sq_wqe, reg_wr(wr));
- break;
- case IB_WR_ATOMIC_CMP_AND_SWP:
- case IB_WR_ATOMIC_FETCH_AND_ADD:
- rc_sq_wqe->rkey = cpu_to_le32(atomic_wr(wr)->rkey);
- rc_sq_wqe->va = cpu_to_le64(atomic_wr(wr)->remote_addr);
- break;
- default:
- break;
- }
-
- roce_set_field(rc_sq_wqe->byte_4, V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OPCODE_M,
- V2_RC_SEND_WQE_BYTE_4_OPCODE_S,
- to_hr_opcode(wr->opcode));
-
if (wr->opcode == IB_WR_ATOMIC_CMP_AND_SWP ||
wr->opcode == IB_WR_ATOMIC_FETCH_AND_ADD)
set_atomic_seg(wr, rc_sq_wqe, valid_num_sge);
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 1/9] RDMA/hns: Refactor process about opcode in post_send()
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 1/9] RDMA/hns: Refactor process about opcode in post_send() Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-18 13:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-19 2:35 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2020-09-18 13:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weihang Li; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:26PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>
> + ret = set_ud_opcode(ud_sq_wqe, wr);
> + if (unlikely(ret)) {
> + ibdev_err(ibdev, "unsupported opcode, opcode = %d.\n",
> + wr->opcode);
No random prints like this. If this is kernel only and something
in-kernel is busted then it is just
if (WARN_ON(ret))
Same for every place in this patch
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 1/9] RDMA/hns: Refactor process about opcode in post_send()
2020-09-18 13:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2020-09-19 2:35 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: liweihang @ 2020-09-19 2:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, Linuxarm
On 2020/9/18 21:47, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:26PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>>
>> + ret = set_ud_opcode(ud_sq_wqe, wr);
>> + if (unlikely(ret)) {
>> + ibdev_err(ibdev, "unsupported opcode, opcode = %d.\n",
>> + wr->opcode);
>
> No random prints like this. If this is kernel only and something
> in-kernel is busted then it is just
>
> if (WARN_ON(ret))
>
> Same for every place in this patch
>
> Jason
>
Thanks for you suggestion, I will modify them.
Weihang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 for-next 2/9] RDMA/hns: Add type check in get/set hw field
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 1/9] RDMA/hns: Refactor process about opcode in post_send() Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-18 13:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 3/9] RDMA/hns: Add interception for resizing SRQs Weihang Li
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
roce_get_field() and roce_set_field() are only used to set variables in
type of __le32, add checks for type to avoid inappropriate assignments.
Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h | 14 ++++++++------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h
index f5669ff..bb440af 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h
@@ -38,16 +38,18 @@
#define roce_raw_write(value, addr) \
__raw_writel((__force u32)cpu_to_le32(value), (addr))
-#define roce_get_field(origin, mask, shift) \
- (((le32_to_cpu(origin)) & (mask)) >> (shift))
+#define roce_get_field(origin, mask, shift) \
+ (((le32_to_cpu(origin) & (mask)) >> (shift)) + \
+ (BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(!__same_type(__le32, (origin)))))
#define roce_get_bit(origin, shift) \
roce_get_field((origin), (1ul << (shift)), (shift))
-#define roce_set_field(origin, mask, shift, val) \
- do { \
- (origin) &= ~cpu_to_le32(mask); \
- (origin) |= cpu_to_le32(((u32)(val) << (shift)) & (mask)); \
+#define roce_set_field(origin, mask, shift, val) \
+ do { \
+ BUILD_BUG_ON(!__same_type(__le32, (origin))); \
+ (origin) &= ~cpu_to_le32(mask); \
+ (origin) |= cpu_to_le32(((u32)(val) << (shift)) & (mask)); \
} while (0)
#define roce_set_bit(origin, shift, val) \
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 2/9] RDMA/hns: Add type check in get/set hw field
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 2/9] RDMA/hns: Add type check in get/set hw field Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-18 13:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-19 8:28 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2020-09-18 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weihang Li; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:27PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
> From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
>
> roce_get_field() and roce_set_field() are only used to set variables in
> type of __le32, add checks for type to avoid inappropriate assignments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h | 14 ++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
I'm skeptical this actually works. __le32 and u32 are the same thing
unless using sparse, and sparse will already catch mis-uses as-is.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 2/9] RDMA/hns: Add type check in get/set hw field
2020-09-18 13:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2020-09-19 8:28 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: liweihang @ 2020-09-19 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, Linuxarm
On 2020/9/18 21:49, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:27PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>> From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
>>
>> roce_get_field() and roce_set_field() are only used to set variables in
>> type of __le32, add checks for type to avoid inappropriate assignments.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h | 14 ++++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> I'm skeptical this actually works. __le32 and u32 are the same thing
> unless using sparse, and sparse will already catch mis-uses as-is.
>
> Jason
>
Umm...You are right. I will drop this one.
Thank you
Weihang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 for-next 3/9] RDMA/hns: Add interception for resizing SRQs
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 1/9] RDMA/hns: Refactor process about opcode in post_send() Weihang Li
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 2/9] RDMA/hns: Add type check in get/set hw field Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-18 14:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 4/9] RDMA/hns: Correct typo of hns_roce_create_cq() Weihang Li
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
From: Yangyang Li <liyangyang20@huawei.com>
HIP08 doesn't support modifying the maximum number of outstanding WR in an
SRQ. However, the driver does not return a failure message, and users may
mistakenly think that the resizing is executed successfully. So the driver
needs to intercept this operation.
Signed-off-by: Yangyang Li <liyangyang20@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index 7f6c707..2643972 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -5047,6 +5047,10 @@ static int hns_roce_v2_modify_srq(struct ib_srq *ibsrq,
struct hns_roce_cmd_mailbox *mailbox;
int ret;
+ /* Resizing SRQs is not supported yet */
+ if (srq_attr_mask & IB_SRQ_MAX_WR)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
if (srq_attr_mask & IB_SRQ_LIMIT) {
if (srq_attr->srq_limit >= srq->wqe_cnt)
return -EINVAL;
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 3/9] RDMA/hns: Add interception for resizing SRQs
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 3/9] RDMA/hns: Add interception for resizing SRQs Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-18 14:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-19 2:44 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2020-09-18 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weihang Li; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:28PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
> From: Yangyang Li <liyangyang20@huawei.com>
>
> HIP08 doesn't support modifying the maximum number of outstanding WR in an
> SRQ. However, the driver does not return a failure message, and users may
> mistakenly think that the resizing is executed successfully. So the driver
> needs to intercept this operation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yangyang Li <liyangyang20@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
Missing fixes line?
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 3/9] RDMA/hns: Add interception for resizing SRQs
2020-09-18 14:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2020-09-19 2:44 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: liweihang @ 2020-09-19 2:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, Linuxarm
On 2020/9/18 22:06, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:28PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>> From: Yangyang Li <liyangyang20@huawei.com>
>>
>> HIP08 doesn't support modifying the maximum number of outstanding WR in an
>> SRQ. However, the driver does not return a failure message, and users may
>> mistakenly think that the resizing is executed successfully. So the driver
>> needs to intercept this operation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yangyang Li <liyangyang20@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> Missing fixes line?
>
> Jason
>
I see. I thought the fixes tag was not required when we add a check like that
in this patch. I will add one, thank you.
Weihang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 for-next 4/9] RDMA/hns: Correct typo of hns_roce_create_cq()
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 3/9] RDMA/hns: Add interception for resizing SRQs Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-18 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 5/9] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration Weihang Li
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
Change "initialze" to "initialize".
Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c
index e87d616..4f4f54f 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c
@@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ int hns_roce_create_cq(struct ib_cq *ib_cq, const struct ib_cq_init_attr *attr,
/*
* For the QP created by kernel space, tptr value should be initialized
* to zero; For the QP created by user space, it will cause synchronous
- * problems if tptr is set to zero here, so we initialze it in user
+ * problems if tptr is set to zero here, so we initialize it in user
* space.
*/
if (!udata && hr_cq->tptr_addr)
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 4/9] RDMA/hns: Correct typo of hns_roce_create_cq()
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 4/9] RDMA/hns: Correct typo of hns_roce_create_cq() Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-18 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-19 2:44 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2020-09-18 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weihang Li; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:29PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
> From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
>
> Change "initialze" to "initialize".
>
> Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Missing fixes line
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 4/9] RDMA/hns: Correct typo of hns_roce_create_cq()
2020-09-18 14:09 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2020-09-19 2:44 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: liweihang @ 2020-09-19 2:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, Linuxarm
On 2020/9/18 22:09, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:29PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>> From: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
>>
>> Change "initialze" to "initialize".
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lang Cheng <chenglang@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_cq.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Missing fixes line
>
> Jason
>
OK, thank you.
Weihang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 for-next 5/9] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 4/9] RDMA/hns: Correct typo of hns_roce_create_cq() Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-18 14:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 6/9] RDMA/hns: Solve the overflow of the calc_pg_sz() Weihang Li
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
From: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
According to the RoCE v1 specification, the sl (service level) 0-7 are
mapped directly to priorities 0-7 respectively, sl 8-15 are reserved. The
driver should verify whether the the value of sl is larger than 7, if so,
an exception should be returned.
Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 12 ++++++++++--
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h | 2 ++
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index 2643972..01aabb7 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -4302,11 +4302,19 @@ static int hns_roce_v2_set_path(struct ib_qp *ibqp,
V2_QPC_BYTE_28_FL_S, 0);
memcpy(context->dgid, grh->dgid.raw, sizeof(grh->dgid.raw));
memset(qpc_mask->dgid, 0, sizeof(grh->dgid.raw));
+
+ hr_qp->sl = rdma_ah_get_sl(&attr->ah_attr);
+ if (unlikely(hr_qp->sl > MAX_SERVICE_LEVEL)) {
+ ibdev_err(ibdev,
+ "failed to fill QPC, sl (%d) shouldn't be larger than %d.\n",
+ hr_qp->sl, MAX_SERVICE_LEVEL);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
roce_set_field(context->byte_28_at_fl, V2_QPC_BYTE_28_SL_M,
- V2_QPC_BYTE_28_SL_S, rdma_ah_get_sl(&attr->ah_attr));
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_28_SL_S, hr_qp->sl);
roce_set_field(qpc_mask->byte_28_at_fl, V2_QPC_BYTE_28_SL_M,
V2_QPC_BYTE_28_SL_S, 0);
- hr_qp->sl = rdma_ah_get_sl(&attr->ah_attr);
return 0;
}
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h
index ac29be4..17f35f9 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h
@@ -1941,6 +1941,8 @@ struct hns_roce_eq_context {
#define HNS_ROCE_V2_AEQE_EVENT_QUEUE_NUM_S 0
#define HNS_ROCE_V2_AEQE_EVENT_QUEUE_NUM_M GENMASK(23, 0)
+#define MAX_SERVICE_LEVEL 0x7
+
struct hns_roce_wqe_atomic_seg {
__le64 fetchadd_swap_data;
__le64 cmp_data;
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 5/9] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 5/9] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-18 14:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-19 2:45 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2020-09-18 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weihang Li; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:30PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
> From: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
>
> According to the RoCE v1 specification, the sl (service level) 0-7 are
> mapped directly to priorities 0-7 respectively, sl 8-15 are reserved. The
> driver should verify whether the the value of sl is larger than 7, if so,
> an exception should be returned.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Missing fixes line
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 5/9] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration
2020-09-18 14:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2020-09-19 2:45 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: liweihang @ 2020-09-19 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, Linuxarm
On 2020/9/18 22:11, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:30PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>> From: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
>>
>> According to the RoCE v1 specification, the sl (service level) 0-7 are
>> mapped directly to priorities 0-7 respectively, sl 8-15 are reserved. The
>> driver should verify whether the the value of sl is larger than 7, if so,
>> an exception should be returned.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 12 ++++++++++--
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.h | 2 ++
>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Missing fixes line
>
> Jason
>
I will add one. Thank you :)
Weihang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 for-next 6/9] RDMA/hns: Solve the overflow of the calc_pg_sz()
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 5/9] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-18 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 7/9] RDMA/hns: Fix the wrong value of rnr_retry when querying qp Weihang Li
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
From: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
calc_pg_sz() may gets a data calculation overflow if the PAGE_SIZE is 64 KB
and hop_num is 2. It is because that all variables involved in calculation
are defined in type of int. So change the type of bt_chunk_size,
buf_chunk_size and obj_per_chunk_default to u64.
Fixes: ba6bb7e97421 ("RDMA/hns: Add interfaces to get pf capabilities from firmware")
Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index 01aabb7..af2dea1 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -1804,9 +1804,9 @@ static void calc_pg_sz(int obj_num, int obj_size, int hop_num, int ctx_bt_num,
int *buf_page_size, int *bt_page_size, u32 hem_type)
{
u64 obj_per_chunk;
- int bt_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
- int buf_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
- int obj_per_chunk_default = buf_chunk_size / obj_size;
+ u64 bt_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
+ u64 buf_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
+ u64 obj_per_chunk_default = buf_chunk_size / obj_size;
*buf_page_size = 0;
*bt_page_size = 0;
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 6/9] RDMA/hns: Solve the overflow of the calc_pg_sz()
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 6/9] RDMA/hns: Solve the overflow of the calc_pg_sz() Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-18 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-09-19 3:04 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2020-09-18 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Weihang Li; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:31PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
> From: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
>
> calc_pg_sz() may gets a data calculation overflow if the PAGE_SIZE is 64 KB
> and hop_num is 2. It is because that all variables involved in calculation
> are defined in type of int. So change the type of bt_chunk_size,
> buf_chunk_size and obj_per_chunk_default to u64.
>
> Fixes: ba6bb7e97421 ("RDMA/hns: Add interfaces to get pf capabilities from firmware")
> Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
> index 01aabb7..af2dea1 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
> @@ -1804,9 +1804,9 @@ static void calc_pg_sz(int obj_num, int obj_size, int hop_num, int ctx_bt_num,
> int *buf_page_size, int *bt_page_size, u32 hem_type)
> {
> u64 obj_per_chunk;
> - int bt_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
> - int buf_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
> - int obj_per_chunk_default = buf_chunk_size / obj_size;
> + u64 bt_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
> + u64 buf_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
This is PAGE_SIZE
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 for-next 6/9] RDMA/hns: Solve the overflow of the calc_pg_sz()
2020-09-18 14:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2020-09-19 3:04 ` liweihang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: liweihang @ 2020-09-19 3:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe; +Cc: dledford, leon, linux-rdma, Linuxarm
On 2020/9/18 22:11, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 04:57:31PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote:
>> From: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
>>
>> calc_pg_sz() may gets a data calculation overflow if the PAGE_SIZE is 64 KB
>> and hop_num is 2. It is because that all variables involved in calculation
>> are defined in type of int. So change the type of bt_chunk_size,
>> buf_chunk_size and obj_per_chunk_default to u64.
>>
>> Fixes: ba6bb7e97421 ("RDMA/hns: Add interfaces to get pf capabilities from firmware")
>> Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang <zhangjiaran@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
>> index 01aabb7..af2dea1 100644
>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
>> @@ -1804,9 +1804,9 @@ static void calc_pg_sz(int obj_num, int obj_size, int hop_num, int ctx_bt_num,
>> int *buf_page_size, int *bt_page_size, u32 hem_type)
>> {
>> u64 obj_per_chunk;
>> - int bt_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
>> - int buf_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
>> - int obj_per_chunk_default = buf_chunk_size / obj_size;
>> + u64 bt_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
>> + u64 buf_chunk_size = 1 << PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> This is PAGE_SIZE
>
> Jason
>
Thanks for your reminder, I fill fix it.
Weihang
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 for-next 7/9] RDMA/hns: Fix the wrong value of rnr_retry when querying qp
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 6/9] RDMA/hns: Solve the overflow of the calc_pg_sz() Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 8/9] RDMA/hns: Fix configuration of ack_req_freq in QPC Weihang Li
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 9/9] RDMA/hns: Fix missing sq_sig_type when querying QP Weihang Li
8 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
From: Wenpeng Liang <liangwenpeng@huawei.com>
The rnr_retry returned to the user is not correct, it should be got from
another fields in QPC.
Fixes: bfe860351e31 ("RDMA/hns: Fix cast from or to restricted __le32 for driver")
Signed-off-by: Wenpeng Liang <liangwenpeng@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index af2dea1..fdbc6b0 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -4810,7 +4810,9 @@ static int hns_roce_v2_query_qp(struct ib_qp *ibqp, struct ib_qp_attr *qp_attr,
qp_attr->retry_cnt = roce_get_field(context.byte_212_lsn,
V2_QPC_BYTE_212_RETRY_CNT_M,
V2_QPC_BYTE_212_RETRY_CNT_S);
- qp_attr->rnr_retry = le32_to_cpu(context.rq_rnr_timer);
+ qp_attr->rnr_retry = roce_get_field(context.byte_244_rnr_rxack,
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_244_RNR_CNT_M,
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_244_RNR_CNT_S);
done:
qp_attr->cur_qp_state = qp_attr->qp_state;
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2 for-next 8/9] RDMA/hns: Fix configuration of ack_req_freq in QPC
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 7/9] RDMA/hns: Fix the wrong value of rnr_retry when querying qp Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 9/9] RDMA/hns: Fix missing sq_sig_type when querying QP Weihang Li
8 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
The hardware will add AckReq flag in BTH header according to the value of
ack_req_freq to request ACK from responder for the packets with this flag.
It should be greater than or equal to lp_pktn_ini instead of using a fixed
value.
Fixes: 7b9bd73ed13d ("RDMA/hns: Fix wrong assignment of lp_pktn_ini in QPC")
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index fdbc6b0..fe11c9a 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -3675,9 +3675,6 @@ static void modify_qp_reset_to_init(struct ib_qp *ibqp,
V2_QPC_BYTE_76_SRQ_EN_S, 1);
}
- roce_set_field(context->byte_172_sq_psn, V2_QPC_BYTE_172_ACK_REQ_FREQ_M,
- V2_QPC_BYTE_172_ACK_REQ_FREQ_S, 4);
-
roce_set_bit(context->byte_172_sq_psn, V2_QPC_BYTE_172_FRE_S, 1);
hr_qp->access_flags = attr->qp_access_flags;
@@ -3988,6 +3985,7 @@ static int modify_qp_init_to_rtr(struct ib_qp *ibqp,
dma_addr_t trrl_ba;
dma_addr_t irrl_ba;
enum ib_mtu mtu;
+ u8 lp_pktn_ini;
u8 port_num;
u64 *mtts;
u8 *dmac;
@@ -4095,13 +4093,21 @@ static int modify_qp_init_to_rtr(struct ib_qp *ibqp,
}
#define MAX_LP_MSG_LEN 65536
- /* MTU*(2^LP_PKTN_INI) shouldn't be bigger than 64kb */
+ /* MTU * (2 ^ LP_PKTN_INI) shouldn't be bigger than 64KB */
+ lp_pktn_ini = ilog2(MAX_LP_MSG_LEN / ib_mtu_enum_to_int(mtu));
+
roce_set_field(context->byte_56_dqpn_err, V2_QPC_BYTE_56_LP_PKTN_INI_M,
- V2_QPC_BYTE_56_LP_PKTN_INI_S,
- ilog2(MAX_LP_MSG_LEN / ib_mtu_enum_to_int(mtu)));
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_56_LP_PKTN_INI_S, lp_pktn_ini);
roce_set_field(qpc_mask->byte_56_dqpn_err, V2_QPC_BYTE_56_LP_PKTN_INI_M,
V2_QPC_BYTE_56_LP_PKTN_INI_S, 0);
+ /* ACK_REQ_FREQ should be larger than or equal to LP_PKTN_INI */
+ roce_set_field(context->byte_172_sq_psn, V2_QPC_BYTE_172_ACK_REQ_FREQ_M,
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_172_ACK_REQ_FREQ_S, lp_pktn_ini);
+ roce_set_field(qpc_mask->byte_172_sq_psn,
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_172_ACK_REQ_FREQ_M,
+ V2_QPC_BYTE_172_ACK_REQ_FREQ_S, 0);
+
roce_set_bit(qpc_mask->byte_108_rx_reqepsn,
V2_QPC_BYTE_108_RX_REQ_PSN_ERR_S, 0);
roce_set_field(qpc_mask->byte_96_rx_reqmsn, V2_QPC_BYTE_96_RX_REQ_MSN_M,
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2 for-next 9/9] RDMA/hns: Fix missing sq_sig_type when querying QP
2020-09-09 8:57 [PATCH v2 for-next 0/9] RDMA/hns: Misc Updates Weihang Li
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-09 8:57 ` [PATCH v2 for-next 8/9] RDMA/hns: Fix configuration of ack_req_freq in QPC Weihang Li
@ 2020-09-09 8:57 ` Weihang Li
8 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Weihang Li @ 2020-09-09 8:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dledford, jgg; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma, linuxarm
The sq_sig_type field should be filled when querying QP, or the users may
get a wrong value.
Fixes: 926a01dc000d ("RDMA/hns: Add QP operations support for hip08 SoC")
Signed-off-by: Weihang Li <liweihang@huawei.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
index fe11c9a..8d30b74 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c
@@ -4834,6 +4834,7 @@ static int hns_roce_v2_query_qp(struct ib_qp *ibqp, struct ib_qp_attr *qp_attr,
}
qp_init_attr->cap = qp_attr->cap;
+ qp_init_attr->sq_sig_type = hr_qp->sq_signal_bits;
out:
mutex_unlock(&hr_qp->mutex);
--
2.8.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread