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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBACCC43387 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 21:20:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8BF521848 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 21:20:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dev-mellanox-co-il.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@dev-mellanox-co-il.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="e7nxbe/u" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727231AbeLQVUs (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2018 16:20:48 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-f68.google.com ([209.85.167.68]:42584 "EHLO mail-lf1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726851AbeLQVUr (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2018 16:20:47 -0500 Received: by mail-lf1-f68.google.com with SMTP id l10so10565658lfh.9 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 13:20:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dev-mellanox-co-il.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oFHE2lkU0CT8piJGZsq12dSz9d6ZsxjmjTwrNvI8XmY=; b=e7nxbe/ueLdW/p7ywohCbx346ndRZie1XUQvdwAmjfZ2aSc5ktporxAv/pehZKIdnD Xs3YUEplQZOV0oz1jjSObRszsqB5G8rha4uXkMOg+LAJqCxsdbFd+tCou6CVUNrBtKnw y/PfR4UZD8Z9iaGCpFE8I7WMZqqB1ih9q+FacgMLds0WKAN2sm5cPY8TqkCKoBBfDTKi Ylw7EdTi96utPDRJtvTgLQfknhloqkDB1hvq+Gz8a/IvwcxtwWTC6ONAkmCod3PWcmfO +rUkHcJbls/lAjUdVXV8cyNDZv1zy49/UnGM0IClvZmp3olepc7lT2LvgtnO+v2eOkPP aa0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oFHE2lkU0CT8piJGZsq12dSz9d6ZsxjmjTwrNvI8XmY=; b=jnGVIlGmNqde4mvnfBJei3VG9OiuJ+wdC+Q994Na4EKQb11YzaG9bGNBODSGN+lhq+ a5szP/YZDZ2nfJnfNdr+RGLDjv1HIJsMQGUU7njXH7Q+w8OOtgpdpTcjPQ4bJsguZ9+C H/fnkFfsbVkW232OHVHArPjD11sWvLskM6RsbxCeoP7/l2EYld80IYbnj1aK4bcP1dAs S8RueQ4skAgm0OAK43bHiHMoxC6ihkz7T1nmi463iVCBmScNz/K9Q7sZnRbenfcm9RIY 3gC0kQ8qWJM9xG2Y8PQDjL2WFZveN1QbBOOdxVRZspqnQzLRYn+FOPt+RUta6nPNRtgO Cqig== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWY2vjWnGZjSKbmYgNEhDLFON15A7LZZMwF7xOfUkRyRk1DWrVeh hjZC6hnOk4XxZTiqsbY6F3WmFj/UlFyS11SZ9+3aUw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/UFYTnBE00Gnw0nbIXUpCOYqTUjXnZrUO2ADbWomxrZAKl0WSOQPP08XJ8oK1f2N9d4wldpw5JPCOKNW9fNonE= X-Received: by 2002:a19:4f0c:: with SMTP id d12mr1753602lfb.121.1545081644633; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 13:20:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181217112546.4e400eb3@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20181217112546.4e400eb3@canb.auug.org.au> From: Saeed Mahameed Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 13:20:33 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: David Miller , Networking , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Or Gerlitz , Saeed Mahameed , Eli Britstein Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c > > between commit: > > 154e62abe9cd ("net/mlx5e: Properly initialize flow attributes for slow path eswitch rule deletion") > > from the net tree and commit: > > e88afe759a49 ("net/mlx5e: Err if asked to mirror a goto chain tc eswitch rule") > e85e02bad29e ("net/mlx5: E-Switch, Rename esw attr mirror count field") > > from the net-next tree. > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly > complex conflicts. > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell > > diff --cc drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c > index 9dabe9d4b279,53ebb5a48018..000000000000 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c > @@@ -870,9 -903,9 +903,9 @@@ mlx5e_tc_offload_to_slow_path(struct ml > struct mlx5_flow_handle *rule; > > memcpy(slow_attr, flow->esw_attr, sizeof(*slow_attr)); > - slow_attr->action = MLX5_FLOW_CONTEXT_ACTION_FWD_DEST, > - slow_attr->split_count = 0, > - slow_attr->dest_chain = FDB_SLOW_PATH_CHAIN, > + slow_attr->action = MLX5_FLOW_CONTEXT_ACTION_FWD_DEST; > - slow_attr->mirror_count = 0; > ++ slow_attr->split_count = 0; > + slow_attr->dest_chain = FDB_SLOW_PATH_CHAIN; > > rule = mlx5e_tc_offload_fdb_rules(esw, flow, spec, slow_attr); > if (!IS_ERR(rule)) > @@@ -887,9 -920,6 +920,9 @@@ mlx5e_tc_unoffload_from_slow_path(struc > struct mlx5_esw_flow_attr *slow_attr) > { > memcpy(slow_attr, flow->esw_attr, sizeof(*slow_attr)); > + slow_attr->action = MLX5_FLOW_CONTEXT_ACTION_FWD_DEST; > - slow_attr->mirror_count = 0; > ++ slow_attr->split_count = 0; > + slow_attr->dest_chain = FDB_SLOW_PATH_CHAIN; > mlx5e_tc_unoffload_fdb_rules(esw, flow, slow_attr); > flow->flags &= ~MLX5E_TC_FLOW_SLOW; > } > @@@ -909,11 -939,13 +942,12 @@@ mlx5e_tc_add_fdb_flow(struct mlx5e_pri > struct mlx5e_rep_priv *rpriv; > struct mlx5e_priv *out_priv; > int err = 0, encap_err = 0; > + int out_index; > > - /* if prios are not supported, keep the old behaviour of using same prio > - * for all offloaded rules. > - */ > - if (!mlx5_eswitch_prios_supported(esw)) > - attr->prio = 1; > + if (!mlx5_eswitch_prios_supported(esw) && attr->prio != 1) { > + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "E-switch priorities unsupported, upgrade FW"); > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + } > > if (attr->chain > max_chain) { > NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Requested chain is out of supported range"); > @@@ -2980,15 -2667,7 +2667,15 @@@ static int parse_tc_fdb_actions(struct > if (!actions_match_supported(priv, exts, parse_attr, flow, extack)) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > + if (attr->dest_chain) { > + if (attr->action & MLX5_FLOW_CONTEXT_ACTION_FWD_DEST) { > + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Mirroring goto chain rules isn't supported"); > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > + } > + attr->action |= MLX5_FLOW_CONTEXT_ACTION_FWD_DEST; > + } > + > - if (attr->mirror_count > 0 && !mlx5_esw_has_fwd_fdb(priv->mdev)) { > + if (attr->split_count > 0 && !mlx5_esw_has_fwd_fdb(priv->mdev)) { > NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, > "current firmware doesn't support split rule for port mirroring"); > netdev_warn_once(priv->netdev, "current firmware doesn't support split rule for port mirroring\n"); Looks good to me.