[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] i40e: Avoid repeating RX filter warning

[Chris Packham]

Hi All,

On 14/05/2026 12:37, Chris Packham wrote:
> When the i40e runs out of space for RX filters the driver switches to
> promiscuous mode and warns that it has done so. In scenarios with a
> large number of these filters this can generate a lot of warnings. For
> example:
>
>    $ dmesg -c > /dev/null
>    $ ip link add dev br0 type bridge vlan_filtering 1 vlan_default_pvid 1
>    $ ip link set dev eth7 master br0
>    $ bridge vlan add vid 1 dev eth7 pvid untagged self
>    $ bridge vlan add vid 2-4094 dev eth7 tagged
>    $ dmesg
>    [   25.601705] i40e 0000:01:00.1: Error LIBIE_AQ_RC_ENOSPC, forcing overflow promiscuous on PF
>    [   25.601833] i40e 0000:01:00.1: Error LIBIE_AQ_RC_ENOSPC, forcing overflow promiscuous on PF
>    [   25.601961] i40e 0000:01:00.1: Error LIBIE_AQ_RC_ENOSPC, forcing overflow promiscuous on PF
>    [   25.602088] i40e 0000:01:00.1: Error LIBIE_AQ_RC_ENOSPC, forcing overflow promiscuous on PF
>    [   25.602216] i40e 0000:01:00.1: Error LIBIE_AQ_RC_ENOSPC, forcing overflow promiscuous on PF
>    [   25.602344] i40e 0000:01:00.1: Error LIBIE_AQ_RC_ENOSPC, forcing overflow promiscuous on PF
>    ...
>
> Use test_and_set_bit() so that the warning is only issued when the
> driver enables promiscuous mode and not on the addition of subsequent RX
> filters.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham at alliedtelesis.co.nz>
> ---
>
> Resend with net-next tag

Has this fallen through the cracks? I've seen some Reviewed-bys but it 
doesn't seem to have been picked up.

>
>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c
> index 926d001b2150..8741990b5a5e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c
> @@ -2408,10 +2408,11 @@ void i40e_aqc_add_filters(struct i40e_vsi *vsi, const char *vsi_name,
>   
>   	if (fcnt != num_add) {
>   		if (vsi->type == I40E_VSI_MAIN) {
> -			set_bit(__I40E_VSI_OVERFLOW_PROMISC, vsi->state);
> -			dev_warn(&vsi->back->pdev->dev,
> -				 "Error %s adding RX filters on %s, promiscuous mode forced on\n",
> -				 libie_aq_str(aq_status), vsi_name);
> +			if (!test_and_set_bit(__I40E_VSI_OVERFLOW_PROMISC, vsi->state)) {
> +				dev_warn(&vsi->back->pdev->dev,
> +					 "Error %s adding RX filters on %s, promiscuous mode forced on\n",
> +					 libie_aq_str(aq_status), vsi_name);
> +			}
>   		} else if (vsi->type == I40E_VSI_SRIOV ||
>   			   vsi->type == I40E_VSI_VMDQ1 ||
>   			   vsi->type == I40E_VSI_VMDQ2) {
> @@ -2461,10 +2462,11 @@ i40e_aqc_broadcast_filter(struct i40e_vsi *vsi, const char *vsi_name,
>   	}
>   
>   	if (aq_ret) {
> -		set_bit(__I40E_VSI_OVERFLOW_PROMISC, vsi->state);
> -		dev_warn(&vsi->back->pdev->dev,
> -			 "Error %s, forcing overflow promiscuous on %s\n",
> -			 libie_aq_str(hw->aq.asq_last_status), vsi_name);
> +		if (!test_and_set_bit(__I40E_VSI_OVERFLOW_PROMISC, vsi->state)) {
> +			dev_warn(&vsi->back->pdev->dev,
> +				 "Error %s, forcing overflow promiscuous on %s\n",
> +				 libie_aq_str(hw->aq.asq_last_status), vsi_name);
> +		}
>   	}
>   
>   	return aq_ret;