Re: [PATCH net-next 11/18] ionic: Add Rx filter and rx_mode nod support

[Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>]

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:24:17 -0700, Shannon Nelson wrote:
> Add the Rx filtering and rx_mode NDO callbacks.  Also add
> the deferred work thread handling needed to manage the filter
> requests otuside of the netif_addr_lock spinlock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson <snelson@pensando.io>

>  static int ionic_vlan_rx_kill_vid(struct net_device *netdev, __be16 proto,
>  				  u16 vid)
>  {
> -	netdev_info(netdev, "%s: stubbed\n", __func__);
> +	struct lif *lif = netdev_priv(netdev);
> +	struct ionic_admin_ctx ctx = {
> +		.work = COMPLETION_INITIALIZER_ONSTACK(ctx.work),
> +		.cmd.rx_filter_del = {
> +			.opcode = CMD_OPCODE_RX_FILTER_DEL,
> +			.lif_index = cpu_to_le16(lif->index),
> +		},
> +	};
> +	struct rx_filter *f;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	spin_lock_bh(&lif->rx_filters.lock);
> +
> +	f = ionic_rx_filter_by_vlan(lif, vid);
> +	if (!f) {
> +		spin_unlock_bh(&lif->rx_filters.lock);
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +	}
> +
> +	netdev_dbg(netdev, "rx_filter del VLAN %d (id %d)\n", vid,
> +		   le32_to_cpu(ctx.cmd.rx_filter_del.filter_id));
> +
> +	ctx.cmd.rx_filter_del.filter_id = cpu_to_le32(f->filter_id);
> +	ionic_rx_filter_free(lif, f);
> +	spin_unlock_bh(&lif->rx_filters.lock);
> +
> +	err = ionic_adminq_post_wait(lif, &ctx);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
> 
>  	return 0;

nit: return directly?

>  }

> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_lif.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_lif.h
> index 8129fa20695a..c3ecf1df9c2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_lif.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_lif.h
> @@ -60,6 +60,29 @@ struct qcq {
>  #define napi_to_qcq(napi)	container_of(napi, struct qcq, napi)
>  #define napi_to_cq(napi)	(&napi_to_qcq(napi)->cq)
>  
> +enum deferred_work_type {
> +	DW_TYPE_RX_MODE,
> +	DW_TYPE_RX_ADDR_ADD,
> +	DW_TYPE_RX_ADDR_DEL,
> +	DW_TYPE_LINK_STATUS,
> +	DW_TYPE_LIF_RESET,
> +};
> +
> +struct deferred_work {

If you don't mind prefixing these structures with ionic_ that'd be
great.  I'm worried deferred_work is too close to delayed_work..

> +	struct list_head list;
> +	enum deferred_work_type type;
> +	union {
> +		unsigned int rx_mode;
> +		u8 addr[ETH_ALEN];
> +	};
> +};
> +
> +struct deferred {
> +	spinlock_t lock;		/* lock for deferred work list */
> +	struct list_head list;
> +	struct work_struct work;
> +};