Date:   Mon, 13 Feb 2023 18:06:09 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
To:     Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@microchip.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Casper Andersson <casper.casan@gmail.com>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>,
        Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@microchip.com>,
        Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@microchip.com>,
        Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/10] net: microchip: sparx5: Clear rule
 counter even if lookup is disabled
Message-ID: <Y+pR4RZ8wJYFgSHL@kadam>
References: <20230213092426.1331379-1-steen.hegelund@microchip.com>
 <20230213092426.1331379-3-steen.hegelund@microchip.com>
 <Y+ofJK2psEnj9QNh@kadam>
 <c5920cb1f3db053c705a988cf484bbbaa5c3dcfa.camel@microchip.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <c5920cb1f3db053c705a988cf484bbbaa5c3dcfa.camel@microchip.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 01:44:35PM +0100, Steen Hegelund wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > > index b2753aac8ad2..0a1d4d740567 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > > @@ -1337,8 +1337,8 @@ static void vcap_api_encode_rule_test(struct kunit
> > > *test)
> > > ????? u32 port_mask_rng_mask = 0x0f;
> > > ????? u32 igr_port_mask_value = 0xffabcd01;
> > > ????? u32 igr_port_mask_mask = ~0;
> > > -???? /* counter is written as the last operation */
> > > -???? u32 expwriteaddr[] = {792, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 792};
> > > +???? /* counter is written as the first operation */
> > > +???? u32 expwriteaddr[] = {792, 792, 793, 794, 795, 796, 797};
> > 
> > So this moves 792 from the last to the first.? I would have expected
> > that that would mean that we had to do something like this as well:
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > index b2753aac8ad2..4d36fad0acab 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c
> > @@ -1400,7 +1400,7 @@ static void vcap_api_encode_rule_test(struct kunit
> > *test)
> > ??????? /* Add rule with write callback */
> > ??????? ret = vcap_add_rule(rule);
> > ??????? KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, ret);
> > -?????? KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 792, is2_admin.last_used_addr);
> > +?????? KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 797, is2_admin.last_used_addr);
> > ??????? for (idx = 0; idx < ARRAY_SIZE(expwriteaddr); ++idx)
> > ??????????????? KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, expwriteaddr[idx],
> > test_updateaddr[idx]);
> > 
> > 
> > But I couldn't really figure out how the .last_used_addr stuff works.
> > And presumably fixing this unit test is the point of the patch...
> 
> It is just the array of addresses written to in the order that they are written,
> so for the visibility I would like to keep it as an array.
> 

My question was likely noise to begin with, but it's not clear that I
phrased it well.  I'm asking that since 797 is now the last element in
the array, I expected that the KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() test for last_used_addr
would have to be changed to 797 as well.

regards,
dan carpenter