> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Kelley (EOSG)
> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2018 12:48 PM
> To: Haiyang Zhang <haiya...@microsoft.com>; da...@davemloft.net;
> netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: KY Srinivasan <k...@microsoft.com>; Stephen Hemminger
> <sthem...@microsoft.com>; o...@aepfle.de; vkuzn...@redhat.com;
> de...@linuxdriverproject.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next,1/2] hv_netvsc: Fix the return status in RX path
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> > <linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org> On Behalf Of Haiyang Zhang
> > Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 12:01 PM
> > To: da...@davemloft.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiya...@microsoft.com>; KY Srinivasan
> > <k...@microsoft.com>; Stephen Hemminger <sthem...@microsoft.com>;
> > o...@aepfle.de; vkuzn...@redhat.com; de...@linuxdriverproject.org;
> > linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: [PATCH net-next,1/2] hv_netvsc: Fix the return status in RX
> > path
> >
> > From: Haiyang Zhang <haiya...@microsoft.com>
> >
> > As defined in hyperv_net.h, the NVSP_STAT_SUCCESS is one not zero.
> > Some functions returns 0 when it actually means NVSP_STAT_SUCCESS.
> > This patch fixes them.
> >
> > In netvsc_receive(), it puts the last RNDIS packet's receive status
> > for all packets in a vmxferpage which may contain multiple RNDIS
> > packets.
> > This patch puts NVSP_STAT_FAIL in the receive completion if one of the
> > packets in a vmxferpage fails.
>
> This patch changes the status field that is being reported back to the Hyper-V
> host in the receive completion message in
> enq_receive_complete(). The current code reports 0 on success,
> and with the patch, it will report 1 on success. So does this change affect
> anything on the Hyper-V side? Or is Hyper-V just ignoring
> the value? If this change doesn't have any impact on the
> interactions with Hyper-V, perhaps it would be good to explain why in the
> commit message.
Here is the definition of each status code for NetVSP.
enum {
NVSP_STAT_NONE = 0,
NVSP_STAT_SUCCESS,
NVSP_STAT_FAIL,
NVSP_STAT_PROTOCOL_TOO_NEW,
NVSP_STAT_PROTOCOL_TOO_OLD,
NVSP_STAT_INVALID_RNDIS_PKT,
NVSP_STAT_BUSY,
NVSP_STAT_PROTOCOL_UNSUPPORTED,
NVSP_STAT_MAX,
};
Existing code returns NVSP_STAT_NONE = 0, and with this patch
we return NVSP_STAT_SUCCESS = 1.
Based on testing, either way works for now. But for correctness
and future stability (e.g. host side becomes more stringent), we
should follow the protocol.
Thanks,
- Haiyang
