net/ice/base: remove unnecessary code

  Update a switch rule' action from "to VSI" to "to VSI List"
should only happen when the same rule has been programmed with
a different fwd destination. This is already handled by below
code block:

m_entry = ice_find_adv_rule_entry(...)
if (m_entry) {
	...
	ice_adv_add_update_vsi_list(...)
}

The following ice_update_pkt_fwd_rule is unnecessary and should be
removed due to:
1) If a switch rule's action is still to VSI, which means, it is
   the first time be issued,  we don't need to update it "to VSI
   List."
2) Actually the implementation does not match the comment, it still
   update the rule with "to VSI" action.

Fixes: fed0c5ca5f19 ("net/ice/base: support programming a new switch recipe")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
---
 drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c | 18 +-----------------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-)
  

On 04/07, Qi Zhang wrote:
>Update a switch rule' action from "to VSI" to "to VSI List"
>should only happen when the same rule has been programmed with
>a different fwd destination. This is already handled by below
>code block:
>
>m_entry = ice_find_adv_rule_entry(...)
>if (m_entry) {
>	...
>	ice_adv_add_update_vsi_list(...)
>}
>
>The following ice_update_pkt_fwd_rule is unnecessary and should be
>removed due to:
>1) If a switch rule's action is still to VSI, which means, it is
>   the first time be issued,  we don't need to update it "to VSI
>   List."
>2) Actually the implementation does not match the comment, it still
>   update the rule with "to VSI" action.
>
>Fixes: fed0c5ca5f19 ("net/ice/base: support programming a new switch recipe")
>Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
>Signed-off-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
>---
> drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c | 18 +-----------------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c b/drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c
>index b5aa5abd9..07f8efd65 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c
>@@ -6695,24 +6695,8 @@ ice_add_adv_rule(struct ice_hw *hw, struct ice_adv_lkup_elem *lkups,
> 	sw->recp_list[rid].adv_rule = true;
> 	rule_head = &sw->recp_list[rid].filt_rules;
> 
>-	if (rinfo->sw_act.fltr_act == ICE_FWD_TO_VSI) {
>-		struct ice_fltr_info tmp_fltr;
>-
>-		ice_memset(&tmp_fltr, 0, sizeof(tmp_fltr), ICE_NONDMA_MEM);
>-		tmp_fltr.fltr_rule_id =
>-			LE16_TO_CPU(s_rule->pdata.lkup_tx_rx.index);
>-		tmp_fltr.fltr_act = ICE_FWD_TO_VSI;
>-		tmp_fltr.fwd_id.hw_vsi_id =
>-			ice_get_hw_vsi_num(hw, vsi_handle);
>-		tmp_fltr.vsi_handle = vsi_handle;
>-		/* Update the previous switch rule of "forward to VSI" to
>-		 * "fwd to VSI list"
>-		 */
>-		status = ice_update_pkt_fwd_rule(hw, &tmp_fltr);
>-		if (status)
>-			goto err_ice_add_adv_rule;
>+	if (rinfo->sw_act.fltr_act == ICE_FWD_TO_VSI)
> 		adv_fltr->vsi_count = 1;
>-	}
> 
> 	/* Add rule entry to book keeping list */
> 	LIST_ADD(&adv_fltr->list_entry, rule_head);
>-- 
>2.13.6
>

Acked-by: Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>

Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel, Thanks.