On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 10:33:34PM +0000, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.k...@canonical.com>
>
> The variable force is being initialized with a value that is
> never read and it is being updated later with a new value. The
> initialization is redundant and can be removed.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.k...@canonical.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> index 6ccaa194733b..ff240e3c29f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
> @@ -5059,7 +5059,7 @@ mlxsw_sp_nexthop_obj_bucket_adj_update(struct mlxsw_sp
> *mlxsw_sp,
> {
> u16 bucket_index = info->nh_res_bucket->bucket_index;
> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack = info->extack;
> - bool force = info->nh_res_bucket->force;
> + bool force;
Actually, there is a bug to be fixed here:
```
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
index 6ccaa194733b..41259c0004d1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_router.c
@@ -5068,8 +5068,9 @@ mlxsw_sp_nexthop_obj_bucket_adj_update(struct mlxsw_sp
*mlxsw_sp,
/* No point in trying an atomic replacement if the idle timer interval
* is smaller than the interval in which we query and clear activity.
*/
- force = info->nh_res_bucket->idle_timer_ms <
- MLXSW_SP_NH_GRP_ACTIVITY_UPDATE_INTERVAL;
+ if (!force && info->nh_res_bucket->idle_timer_ms <
+ MLXSW_SP_NH_GRP_ACTIVITY_UPDATE_INTERVAL)
+ force = true;
adj_index = nh->nhgi->adj_index + bucket_index;
err = mlxsw_sp_nexthop_update(mlxsw_sp, adj_index, nh, force, ratr_pl);
```
We should only fallback to a non-atomic replacement when the current
replacement is atomic and the idle timer is too short.
We currently ignore the value of 'force'. This means that a non-atomic
replacement ('force' is true) can be made atomic if idle timer is larger
than 1 second.
Colin, do you mind if I submit it formally as a fix later this week? I
want to run it through our usual process. Will mention you in
Reported-by, obviously.
> char ratr_pl_new[MLXSW_REG_RATR_LEN];
> char ratr_pl[MLXSW_REG_RATR_LEN];
> u32 adj_index;
> --
> 2.30.2
>
