> -----Original Message----- > From: Paolo Abeni <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2026 4:57 AM > To: Haiyang Zhang <[email protected]>; linux- > [email protected]; [email protected]; KY Srinivasan > <[email protected]>; Haiyang Zhang <[email protected]>; Wei Liu > <[email protected]>; Dexuan Cui <[email protected]>; Long Li > <[email protected]>; Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>; David S. > Miller <[email protected]>; Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>; Jakub > Kicinski <[email protected]>; Konstantin Taranov <[email protected]>; > Simon Horman <[email protected]>; Erni Sri Satya Vennela > <[email protected]>; Dipayaan Roy > <[email protected]>; Aditya Garg > <[email protected]>; Breno Leitao <[email protected]>; linux- > [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: Paul Rosswurm <[email protected]> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH net-next v4] net: mana: Add Interrupt > Moderation support > > On 6/29/26 11:36 PM, Haiyang Zhang wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c > b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c > > index 7438ea6b3f26..9391e9564605 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c > > @@ -1591,6 +1591,9 @@ int mana_create_wq_obj(struct mana_port_context > *apc, > > > > mana_gd_init_req_hdr(&req.hdr, MANA_CREATE_WQ_OBJ, > > sizeof(req), sizeof(resp)); > > + > > + req.hdr.req.msg_version = GDMA_MESSAGE_V3; > > + req.hdr.resp.msg_version = GDMA_MESSAGE_V2; > > Double checking the above is intentional; it feels strange to me that > request and reply use different versions. Possibly a comment for future > memory would make sense.
Yes, it's intentional. The request and reply versions can be different. I will add comments. > > + > > +/* The caller must update apc->rx/tx_dim_enabled before disabling and > > + * after enabling. And synchronize_net() before draining the DIM work, > > + * so that NAPI cannot observe a stale flag. > > + */ > > +int mana_dim_change(struct mana_cq *cq, bool enable) > > This always return 0, and the return value is not checked by the > callers; return type should likelly changed to void Will update. Thanks, - Haiyang
