Hi,>
On 2022/11/23 1:22, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:26:30AM +0900, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
vf reset nack actually represents the reset operation itself is
performed but no address is assigned. Therefore, e1000_reset_hw_vf
should fill the "perm_addr" with the zero address and return success on
such an occasion. This prevents its callers in netdev.c from saying PF
still resetting, and instead allows them to correctly report that no
address is assigned.
What's the v1->v2 diff?
Sorry, I mistakenly added you to CC (and didn't tell you the context). The diff is only in the message. For details, please look at:
https://patchew.org/linux/20221122092707.30981-1-akihiko.odaki@xxxxxxxxxx/#647a4053-bae0-6c06-3049-274d389c2bdd@xxxxxxxxxx
Probably route to net and add fixes tag?It is hard to determine the cause of the bug because it is about undocumented ABI. Linux introduced E1000_VF_RESET | E1000_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK response with commit 6ddbc4cf1f4d ("igb: Indicate failure on vf reset for empty mac address") so one can say it is the cause of the bug.
However, the PF may be driven by someone else Linux (Windows in particular), and if such system have already had E1000_VF_RESET | E1000_VT_MSGTYPE_NACK response defined, it can be said the bug existed even before Linux changes how the PF responds to E1000_VF_RESET request.