Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: sparx5: add support for tc flower mirred action.
From: Daniel Machon
Date: Thu Apr 04 2024 - 03:59:24 EST
> The 04/03/2024 20:41, Daniel Machon wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> ...
>
> > +static int sparx5_tc_action_mirred(struct vcap_admin *admin,
> > + struct vcap_rule *vrule,
> > + struct flow_cls_offload *fco,
> > + struct flow_action_entry *act)
> > +{
> > + struct vcap_u72_action ports = {0};
>
> Maybe this is just a preferences, but usually we use memset instead of {0};
Yes, I think this falls under preference. I'd like to keep this one as
is.
>
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (admin->vtype != VCAP_TYPE_IS0 && admin->vtype != VCAP_TYPE_IS2) {
> > + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(fco->common.extack,
> > + "Mirror action not supported in this VCAP");
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > + }
> > +
> > + err = vcap_rule_add_action_u32(vrule, VCAP_AF_MASK_MODE,
> > + SPX5_PMM_OR_DSTMASK);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + sparx5_tc_flower_set_port_mask(&ports, act->dev);
> > +
> > + err = vcap_rule_add_action_u72(vrule, VCAP_AF_PORT_MASK, &ports);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
>
> You can just return directly the return value from vcap_rule_add_action_u72
> Something like:
>
> return vcap_rule_add_action_u72(...)
>
Yes, seems like a reasonable change :-) I need to respin anyway, since
NIPA is complaining about something I didn't catch in my local run. Will
incorporate changes in v2 - thanks.
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
>
> --
> /Horatiu