On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 06:12:35AM -0700, Aditya Garg wrote:
> The MANA hardware supports a maximum of 30 scatter-gather entries (SGEs)
> per TX WQE. Exceeding this limit can cause TX failures.
> Add ndo_features_check() callback to validate SKB layout before
> transmission. For GSO SKBs that would exceed the hardware SGE limit, clear
> NETIF_F_GSO_MASK to enforce software segmentation in the stack.
> Add a fallback in mana_start_xmit() to linearize non-GSO SKBs that still
> exceed the SGE limit.
> 
> Return NETDEV_TX_BUSY only for -ENOSPC from mana_gd_post_work_request(),
> send other errors to free_sgl_ptr to free resources and record the tx
> drop.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Dipayaan Roy <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dipayaan Roy <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Aditya Garg <[email protected]>

...

> @@ -289,6 +290,21 @@ netdev_tx_t mana_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct 
> net_device *ndev)
>       cq = &apc->tx_qp[txq_idx].tx_cq;
>       tx_stats = &txq->stats;
>  
> +     if (MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 2 > MAX_TX_WQE_SGL_ENTRIES &&
> +         skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags + 2 > MAX_TX_WQE_SGL_ENTRIES) {
> +             /* GSO skb with Hardware SGE limit exceeded is not expected here
> +              * as they are handled in mana_features_check() callback
> +              */

Hi,

I'm curious to know if we actually need this code.
Are there cases where the mana_features_check() doesn't
handle things and the kernel will reach this line?

> +             if (skb_is_gso(skb))
> +                     netdev_warn_once(ndev, "GSO enabled skb exceeds max SGE 
> limit\n");
> +             if (skb_linearize(skb)) {
> +                     netdev_warn_once(ndev, "Failed to linearize skb with 
> nr_frags=%d and is_gso=%d\n",
> +                                      skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags,
> +                                      skb_is_gso(skb));
> +                     goto tx_drop_count;
> +             }
> +     }
> +
>       pkg.tx_oob.s_oob.vcq_num = cq->gdma_id;
>       pkg.tx_oob.s_oob.vsq_frame = txq->vsq_frame;
>  

...

Reply via email to