Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] net/smc: use ib_device_get_netdev() helper to get netdev info

From: Dust Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 10:43:58 +0800

On 2024-08-12 10:07:42, liujian (CE) wrote:
>
>
>在 2024/8/9 22:59, Dust Li 写道:
>> On 2024-08-09 16:31:46, Liu Jian wrote:
>> > Currently, in the SMC protocol, network devices are obtained by calling
>> > ib_device_ops.get_netdev(). But for some drivers, this callback function
>> > is not implemented separately. Therefore, here I modified to use
>> > ib_device_get_netdev() to get net_device.
>> > 
>> > For rdma devices that do not implement ib_device_ops.get_netdev(), one of
>> > the issues addressed is as follows:
>> > before:
>> > smcr device
>> > Net-Dev         IB-Dev   IB-P  IB-State  Type        Crit  #Links  PNET-ID
>> >                 rxee        1    ACTIVE  0               No       0
>> > 
>> > after:
>> > smcr device
>> > Net-Dev         IB-Dev   IB-P  IB-State  Type        Crit  #Links  PNET-ID
>> > enp1s0f1        rxee        1    ACTIVE  0               No       0
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Liu Jian <[email-masked]>
>> > ---
>> > net/smc/smc_ib.c   | 8 +++-----
>> > net/smc/smc_pnet.c | 6 +-----
>> > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>> > 
>> > diff --git a/net/smc/smc_ib.c b/net/smc/smc_ib.c
>> > index 9297dc20bfe2..382351ac9434 100644
>> > --- a/net/smc/smc_ib.c
>> > +++ b/net/smc/smc_ib.c
>> > @@ -899,9 +899,7 @@ static void smc_copy_netdev_ifindex(struct smc_ib_device *smcibdev, int port)
>> > 	struct ib_device *ibdev = smcibdev->ibdev;
>> > 	struct net_device *ndev;
>> > 
>> > -	if (!ibdev->ops.get_netdev)
>> > -		return;
>> > -	ndev = ibdev->ops.get_netdev(ibdev, port + 1);
>> > +	ndev = ib_device_get_netdev(ibdev, port + 1);
>> > 	if (ndev) {
>> > 		smcibdev->ndev_ifidx[port] = ndev->ifindex;
>> > 		dev_put(ndev);
>> > @@ -921,9 +919,9 @@ void smc_ib_ndev_change(struct net_device *ndev, unsigned long event)
>> > 		port_cnt = smcibdev->ibdev->phys_port_cnt;
>> > 		for (i = 0; i < min_t(size_t, port_cnt, SMC_MAX_PORTS); i++) {
>> > 			libdev = smcibdev->ibdev;
>> > -			if (!libdev->ops.get_netdev)
>> > +			lndev = ib_device_get_netdev(libdev, i + 1);
>> > +			if (!lndev)
>> > 				continue;
>> > -			lndev = libdev->ops.get_netdev(libdev, i + 1);
>> > 			dev_put(lndev);
>> > 			if (lndev != ndev)
>> > 				continue;
>> > diff --git a/net/smc/smc_pnet.c b/net/smc/smc_pnet.c
>> > index 2adb92b8c469..a55a697a48de 100644
>> > --- a/net/smc/smc_pnet.c
>> > +++ b/net/smc/smc_pnet.c
>> > @@ -1055,11 +1055,7 @@ static void smc_pnet_find_rdma_dev(struct net_device *netdev,
>> > 			continue;
>> > 
>> > 		for (i = 1; i <= SMC_MAX_PORTS; i++) {
>> > -			if (!rdma_is_port_valid(ibdev->ibdev, i))
>> > -				continue;
>> 
>> Why remove this check ?
>> 
>Hi, Dust,
>The same check is already in ib_device_get_netdev().

Oh I see, thanks !

Reviewed-by: Dust Li <[email-masked]>

>> Best regard,
>> Dust
>> 
>> 
>> > -			if (!ibdev->ibdev->ops.get_netdev)
>> > -				continue;
>> > -			ndev = ibdev->ibdev->ops.get_netdev(ibdev->ibdev, i);
>> > +			ndev = ib_device_get_netdev(ibdev->ibdev, i);
>> > 			if (!ndev)
>> > 				continue;
>> > 			dev_put(ndev);
>> > -- 
>> > 2.34.1
>> >