Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <24fd3d18-0c09-8235-c88d-d7e151110ebe@molgen.mpg.de>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 15:17:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.5.0
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igbvf: Regard vf reset nack as success
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@daynix.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Yan Vugenfirer <yan@daynix.com>,
        intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20221122092707.30981-1-akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>
From:   Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20221122092707.30981-1-akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Dear Akihiko,


Thank you for your patch.


Am 22.11.22 um 10:27 schrieb Akihiko Odaki:
> vf reset nack actually represents the reset operation itself is
> performed but no address is not assigned. Therefore, e1000_reset_hw_vf

Is … no … not assigned … intentional?

> should fill the "perm_addr" with the zero address and return success on
> such an occassion. This prevents its callers in netdev.c from saying PF

occasion

> still resetting, and instead allows them to correctly report that no
> address is assigned.

In what environment do you hit the problem?

[…]


Kind regards,

Paul