[PATCH net] net/mlx5: Lag, Return error when enabling MPESW without LAG support

[PATCH net] net/mlx5: Lag, Return error when enabling MPESW without LAG support

[Tariq Toukan]

From: Uri Dar <udar@nvidia.com>

When firmware reports a function as not LAG capable (lag_master=0 or
num_lag_ports < 2), mlx5_lag_add_mdev() creates no LAG object for it.
Enabling multiport E-Switch on such a device returns 0 from
mlx5_lag_mpesw_queue_work(), so
"devlink dev param set ... esw_multiport value true" reports success
although nothing was enabled, and a following "devlink dev param show"
still reports false.

Return -EOPNOTSUPP instead. mlx5_lag_mpesw_disable() ignores the return
value, so disabling keeps its current behavior.

Fixes: a32327a3a02c ("net/mlx5: Lag, Control MultiPort E-Switch single FDB mode")
Signed-off-by: Uri Dar <udar@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Shay Drori <shayd@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/mpesw.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/mpesw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/mpesw.c
index abf72026c751..549d31812c2f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/mpesw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/mpesw.c
@@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ static int mlx5_lag_mpesw_queue_work(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev,
 	int err = 0;
 
 	if (!ldev)
-		return 0;
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
 	work = kzalloc_obj(*work);
 	if (!work)

base-commit: b71c101bbb9814d163c00234d43c41f0a17907d4
-- 
2.44.0

Re: [PATCH net] net/mlx5: Lag, Return error when enabling MPESW without LAG support

[netdev-bot+sinfo]

Hi!

This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its
commit messages seem to be missing some information:

 - What hardware the change was tested on. For driver fixes please
   mention the device (and if relevant firmware version) used for
   testing, or say that the change was not tested on real hardware.

Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead,
reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers
can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for
other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages
then.

The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think
that is the case please reply and explain.