On 11/27/2016 9:35 AM, Jingjing Wu wrote:
> Casting from structs which lay out data in typed members
> to structs which have flat memory buffers, will cause
> problems if the alignment of the former isn't as expected.
> This patch removes the casting between structs.
>
> Fixes: ae19955e7c86 ("i40evf: support reporting PF reset")
> Signed-off-by: Jingjing Wu <jingjing.wu at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c
> b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c
> index aa306d6..53d7c87 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c
> @@ -1336,8 +1336,9 @@ i40evf_handle_aq_msg(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> struct i40e_hw *hw = I40E_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data->dev_private);
> struct i40e_vf *vf = I40EVF_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_VF(dev->data->dev_private);
> struct i40e_arq_event_info info;
> - struct i40e_virtchnl_msg *v_msg;
> - uint16_t pending, opcode;
> + uint16_t pending, aq_opc;
> + enum i40e_virtchnl_ops msg_opc;
> + enum i40e_status_code msg_ret;
> int ret;
>
> info.buf_len = I40E_AQ_BUF_SZ;
> @@ -1346,7 +1347,6 @@ i40evf_handle_aq_msg(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> return;
> }
> info.msg_buf = vf->aq_resp;
> - v_msg = (struct i40e_virtchnl_msg *)&info.desc;
>
> pending = 1;
> while (pending) {
> @@ -1357,32 +1357,35 @@ i40evf_handle_aq_msg(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
> "ret: %d", ret);
> break;
> }
> - opcode = rte_le_to_cpu_16(info.desc.opcode);
> -
> - switch (opcode) {
> + aq_opc = rte_le_to_cpu_16(info.desc.opcode);
> + msg_opc = (enum i40e_virtchnl_ops)rte_le_to_cpu_32(
> + info.desc.cookie_high);
> + msg_ret = (enum i40e_status_code)rte_le_to_cpu_32(
> + info.desc.cookie_low);
What do you think commenting cookie_high is opcode and cookie_low is
return_value?
> + switch (aq_opc) {
> case i40e_aqc_opc_send_msg_to_vf:
> - if (v_msg->v_opcode == I40E_VIRTCHNL_OP_EVENT)
> + if (msg_opc == I40E_VIRTCHNL_OP_EVENT)
> /* process event*/
> i40evf_handle_pf_event(dev, info.msg_buf,
> info.msg_len);
> else {
> /* read message and it's expected one */
> - if (v_msg->v_opcode == vf->pend_cmd) {
> - vf->cmd_retval = v_msg->v_retval;
> + if (msg_opc == vf->pend_cmd) {
> + vf->cmd_retval = msg_ret;
> /* prevent compiler reordering */
> rte_compiler_barrier();
> _clear_cmd(vf);
> } else
> PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "command mismatch,"
> "expect %u, get %u",
> - vf->pend_cmd, v_msg->v_opcode);
> + vf->pend_cmd, msg_ret);
s/msg_ret/msg_opc/ ?
> PMD_DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "adminq response is
> received,"
> - " opcode = %d\n", v_msg->v_opcode);
> + " opcode = %d\n", msg_ret);
s/msg_ret/msg_opc/ ?
> }
> break;
> default:
> PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Request %u is not supported yet",
> - opcode);
> + aq_opc);
> break;
> }
> }
>
