Commit 13ba7943 authored by Somnath Kotur's avatar Somnath Kotur Committed by Jakub Kicinski

bnxt_en: Fix possible bnxt_open() failure caused by wrong RFS flag

bnxt_open() can fail in this code path, especially on a VF when
it fails to reserve default rings:

bnxt_open()
  __bnxt_open_nic()
    bnxt_clear_int_mode()
    bnxt_init_dflt_ring_mode()

RX rings would be set to 0 when we hit this error path.

It is possible for a subsequent bnxt_open() call to potentially succeed
with a code path like this:

bnxt_open()
  bnxt_hwrm_if_change()
    bnxt_fw_init_one()
      bnxt_fw_init_one_p3()
        bnxt_set_dflt_rfs()
          bnxt_rfs_capable()
            bnxt_hwrm_reserve_rings()

On older chips, RFS is capable if we can reserve the number of vnics that
is equal to RX rings + 1.  But since RX rings is still set to 0 in this
code path, we may mistakenly think that RFS is supported for 0 RX rings.

Later, when the default RX rings are reserved and we try to enable
RFS, it would fail and cause bnxt_open() to fail unnecessarily.

We fix this in 2 places.  bnxt_rfs_capable() will always return false if
RX rings is not yet set.  bnxt_init_dflt_ring_mode() will call
bnxt_set_dflt_rfs() which will always clear the RFS flags if RFS is not
supported.

Fixes: 20d7d1c5 ("bnxt_en: reliably allocate IRQ table on reset to avoid crash")
Signed-off-by: default avatarSomnath Kotur <somnath.kotur@broadcom.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarMichael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
parent 5ef9b803
...@@ -10983,7 +10983,7 @@ static bool bnxt_rfs_capable(struct bnxt *bp) ...@@ -10983,7 +10983,7 @@ static bool bnxt_rfs_capable(struct bnxt *bp)
if (bp->flags & BNXT_FLAG_CHIP_P5) if (bp->flags & BNXT_FLAG_CHIP_P5)
return bnxt_rfs_supported(bp); return bnxt_rfs_supported(bp);
if (!(bp->flags & BNXT_FLAG_MSIX_CAP) || !bnxt_can_reserve_rings(bp)) if (!(bp->flags & BNXT_FLAG_MSIX_CAP) || !bnxt_can_reserve_rings(bp) || !bp->rx_nr_rings)
return false; return false;
vnics = 1 + bp->rx_nr_rings; vnics = 1 + bp->rx_nr_rings;
...@@ -13234,10 +13234,9 @@ static int bnxt_init_dflt_ring_mode(struct bnxt *bp) ...@@ -13234,10 +13234,9 @@ static int bnxt_init_dflt_ring_mode(struct bnxt *bp)
goto init_dflt_ring_err; goto init_dflt_ring_err;
bp->tx_nr_rings_per_tc = bp->tx_nr_rings; bp->tx_nr_rings_per_tc = bp->tx_nr_rings;
if (bnxt_rfs_supported(bp) && bnxt_rfs_capable(bp)) {
bp->flags |= BNXT_FLAG_RFS; bnxt_set_dflt_rfs(bp);
bp->dev->features |= NETIF_F_NTUPLE;
}
init_dflt_ring_err: init_dflt_ring_err:
bnxt_ulp_irq_restart(bp, rc); bnxt_ulp_irq_restart(bp, rc);
return rc; return rc;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment