Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-31272-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 14:49:26 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Suresh Kumar <suresh2514@gmail.com>
Cc: jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
	pabeni@redhat.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i40e: print correct hw max rss count in kernel ring
 buffer
Message-ID: <20240119144926.GA89683@kernel.org>
References: <20240119131652.8050-1-suresh2514@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240119131652.8050-1-suresh2514@gmail.com>

On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 06:46:52PM +0530, Suresh Kumar wrote:
> The value printed for  "HW max RSS count" is wrong in kernel dmesg for i40e
> NICs:
> 
>   ... i40e 0000:63:00.0: User requested queue count/HW max RSS count: 48/64
> 
> whereas  ethtool reports the correct value from "vsi->num_queue_pairs"
> 
> Channel parameters for eno33:
> Pre-set maximums:
> RX:     n/a
> TX:     n/a
> Other:      1
> Combined:   96
> Current hardware settings:
> RX:     n/a
> TX:     n/a
> Other:      1
> Combined:   96  <-------
> 
> and is misleading.
> 
> This value is printed from 'pf->rss_size_max' which seems hardcoded.
> 
> Below commit also removed this 64 limit:
> 
> Commit e56afa599609d3afe8b0ce24b553ab95e9782502
> Author: Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@intel.com>
> Date:   Wed Nov 8 16:38:43 2017 -0800
> 
>     i40e: Remove limit of 64 max queues per channel

Hi Suresh,

I think it would be more normal to cite this commit something like this:

The limit of 64 was removed by
commit e56afa599609 ("i40e: Remove limit of 64 max queues per channel")

Also, it's not clear to me if this should be considered a fix or not.
If not, which I lean towards, then it should probably be targeted
at iwl-next.

	Subject: [PATCH iwl-next] ...

If it is a fix, then it should have a Fixes tag and probably
be targeted at iwl.

	Subject: [PATCH iwl] ...

..