Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Dynamically allocate BPIDs for LBK

[Jiri Pirko]

Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 08:54:39AM CET, gakula@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>In current driver 64 BPIDs are reserved for LBK interfaces.
>These bpids are 1-to-1 mapped to LBK interface channel numbers.
>In some usecases one LBK interface required more than one bpids
>and in some case they may not require at all. These usescas
>can't be address with the current implementation as it always
>reserves only one bpid per LBK channel. 
>
>This patch addresses this issue by creating free bpid pool from
>these 64 bpids instead of 1-to-1 mapping to the lbk channel.
>Now based on usecase LBK interface can request a bpid using (bp_enable()).
>
>
>v1 -> v2:
>   - Modified commit message.
>   - Dropped patch2, as for now rvu netdev have no usecase. Will
>     be upstream along with the CPT driver.
>   - Addressed review comments by Simon Horman. 
>
>Geetha sowjanya (2):
>  octeontx2-af: Create BPIDs free pool
>  octeontx2-af: Cleanup loopback device checks
>
> .../net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/mbox.h  |   2 +
> .../net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu.c   |  14 +-
> .../net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu.h   |  21 +-
> .../ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_nix.c   | 179 ++++++++++++++----
> .../ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_npc.c   |   8 +-
> .../ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_reg.h   |   3 +
> .../ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_sdp.c   |   6 +-
> 7 files changed, 181 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)

FWIW: I don't see anything problematic in this patchset. From that
perspective:
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxx>