[PATCH net-next v5] net: ti: icssg_prueth: add TAPRIO offload support
Paolo Abeni
pabeni at redhat.com
Thu May 2 04:59:51 PDT 2024
On Mon, 2024-04-29 at 16:00 +0530, MD Danish Anwar wrote:
> +static int emac_taprio_replace(struct net_device *ndev,
> + struct tc_taprio_qopt_offload *taprio)
> +{
> + struct prueth_emac *emac = netdev_priv(ndev);
> + struct tc_taprio_qopt_offload *est_new;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (taprio->cycle_time_extension) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(taprio->extack, "Cycle time extension not supported");
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> +
> + if (taprio->cycle_time < TAS_MIN_CYCLE_TIME) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(taprio->extack, "cycle_time %llu is less than min supported cycle_time %d",
> + taprio->cycle_time, TAS_MIN_CYCLE_TIME);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (taprio->num_entries > TAS_MAX_CMD_LISTS) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_FMT_MOD(taprio->extack, "num_entries %lu is more than max supported entries %d",
> + taprio->num_entries, TAS_MAX_CMD_LISTS);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (emac->qos.tas.taprio_admin)
> + devm_kfree(&ndev->dev, emac->qos.tas.taprio_admin);
it looks like 'qos.tas.taprio_admin' is initialized from
taprio_offload_get(), so it should be free with taprio_offload_free(),
right?
> +
> + est_new = devm_kzalloc(&ndev->dev,
> + struct_size(est_new, entries, taprio->num_entries),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!est_new)
> + return -ENOMEM;
Why are you allocating 'est_new'? it looks like it's not used
anywhere?!?
> +
> + emac->qos.tas.taprio_admin = taprio_offload_get(taprio);
> + ret = tas_update_oper_list(emac);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
Should the above clear 'taprio_admin' on error, as well?
>
Thanks,
Paolo
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list