From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=waldekranz-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=Eze/8M2gI0/1aPxBC8oNjaaWCvFby/x8ND3xWZra1Gk=; b=JDhd3TyE53QQTFNn518ewb1ExwOApdXXEJW1aDE5Be9Sn0zuMirJ8Zcd1A7MCvaWUq 3XY1fjzMggkv1ldxzwzocSmv1scaP04XFE6RTGdib7C9HaN+7mtWgNMZRQPsZ240A67O r0KuwT9DXQgPlm+L8Hnn+lBh3z/Kuea3tYpzU94npVEKbM1IWMUdqk6ZKyM3jPHfxomn TuB1c4r/lDva+znWi2Pkte+YKJ4y1EYwGSE9HaFN2O1ViJIM1DNG0hpplTzWPYsjwhSb +zCLVnrLindrZjLE51fDCHSCnywUvQ2fbUi7INLA4x1UZ8t9+gngZ1w1In3Cwl1xYCFj WJmg== From: Tobias Waldekranz In-Reply-To: <20220303222658.7ykn6grkkp6htm7a@skbuf> References: <20220301100321.951175-1-tobias@waldekranz.com> <20220301100321.951175-11-tobias@waldekranz.com> <20220303222658.7ykn6grkkp6htm7a@skbuf> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:14:31 +0100 Message-ID: <87k0d1n8ko.fsf@waldekranz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 10/10] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: MST Offloading List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Vladimir Oltean Cc: Ivan Vecera , Andrew Lunn , Florian Fainelli , Jiri Pirko , Petr Machata , Nikolay Aleksandrov , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, Russell King , Vivien Didelot , Ido Schimmel , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Cooper Lees , Roopa Prabhu , kuba@kernel.org, Matt Johnston , davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 00:26, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:03:21AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote: >> Allocate a SID in the STU for each MSTID in use by a bridge and handle >> the mapping of MSTIDs to VLANs using the SID field of each VTU entry. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tobias Waldekranz >> --- >> drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 178 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.h | 13 +++ >> 2 files changed, 191 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c >> index c14a62aa6a6c..4fb4ec1dff79 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c >> @@ -1818,6 +1818,137 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_stu_setup(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip) >> return mv88e6xxx_stu_loadpurge(chip, &stu); >> } >> >> +static int mv88e6xxx_sid_new(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, u8 *sid) >> +{ >> + DECLARE_BITMAP(busy, MV88E6XXX_N_SID) = { 0 }; >> + struct mv88e6xxx_mst *mst; >> + >> + set_bit(0, busy); >> + >> + list_for_each_entry(mst, &chip->msts, node) { >> + set_bit(mst->stu.sid, busy); >> + } >> + >> + *sid = find_first_zero_bit(busy, MV88E6XXX_N_SID); >> + >> + return (*sid >= mv88e6xxx_max_sid(chip)) ? -ENOSPC : 0; >> +} >> + >> +static int mv88e6xxx_sid_put(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, u8 sid) >> +{ >> + struct mv88e6xxx_mst *mst, *tmp; >> + int err = 0; >> + >> + list_for_each_entry_safe(mst, tmp, &chip->msts, node) { >> + if (mst->stu.sid == sid) { >> + if (refcount_dec_and_test(&mst->refcnt)) { >> + mst->stu.valid = false; >> + err = mv88e6xxx_stu_loadpurge(chip, &mst->stu); > > It is interesting what to do if this fails. Possibly not this, because > the entry remains in hardware but not in software. True, I will let the error bubble up and keep the SW state in sync with the hardware. >> + list_del(&mst->node); >> + kfree(mst); >> + } >> + >> + return err; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + return -ENOENT; >> +} >> + >> +static int mv88e6xxx_sid_get(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, struct net_device *br, >> + u16 msti, u8 *sid) >> +{ >> + struct mv88e6xxx_mst *mst; >> + int err, i; >> + >> + if (!br) >> + return 0; > > Is this condition possible? Removing. >> + >> + if (!mv88e6xxx_has_stu(chip)) >> + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> + >> + list_for_each_entry(mst, &chip->msts, node) { >> + if (mst->br == br && mst->msti == msti) { >> + refcount_inc(&mst->refcnt); >> + *sid = mst->stu.sid; >> + return 0; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + err = mv88e6xxx_sid_new(chip, sid); >> + if (err) >> + return err; >> + >> + mst = kzalloc(sizeof(*mst), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!mst) >> + return -ENOMEM; > > This leaks the new SID. I don't think so, the SID is just calculated based on what is in chip->msts. However: - The naming is bad. Will change. >> + >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&mst->node); >> + refcount_set(&mst->refcnt, 1); >> + mst->br = br; >> + mst->msti = msti; >> + mst->stu.valid = true; >> + mst->stu.sid = *sid; >> + >> + /* The bridge starts out all ports in the disabled state. But >> + * a STU state of disabled means to go by the port-global >> + * state. So we set all user port's initial state to blocking, >> + * to match the bridge's behavior. >> + */ >> + for (i = 0; i < mv88e6xxx_num_ports(chip); i++) >> + mst->stu.state[i] = dsa_is_user_port(chip->ds, i) ? >> + MV88E6XXX_PORT_CTL0_STATE_BLOCKING : >> + MV88E6XXX_PORT_CTL0_STATE_DISABLED; >> + >> + list_add_tail(&mst->node, &chip->msts); >> + return mv88e6xxx_stu_loadpurge(chip, &mst->stu); > > And this doesn't behave too well on failure (the MSTID exists in > software but not in hardware). Yes, fixing in v3. >> +} >> + >> +static int mv88e6xxx_port_mst_state_set(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, >> + const struct switchdev_mst_state *st) >> +{ >> + struct dsa_port *dp = dsa_to_port(ds, port); >> + struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip = ds->priv; >> + struct mv88e6xxx_mst *mst; >> + u8 state; >> + int err; >> + >> + if (!mv88e6xxx_has_stu(chip)) >> + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> + >> + switch (st->state) { >> + case BR_STATE_DISABLED: >> + case BR_STATE_BLOCKING: >> + case BR_STATE_LISTENING: >> + state = MV88E6XXX_PORT_CTL0_STATE_BLOCKING; >> + break; >> + case BR_STATE_LEARNING: >> + state = MV88E6XXX_PORT_CTL0_STATE_LEARNING; >> + break; >> + case BR_STATE_FORWARDING: >> + state = MV88E6XXX_PORT_CTL0_STATE_FORWARDING; >> + break; >> + default: >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + list_for_each_entry(mst, &chip->msts, node) { >> + if (mst->br == dsa_port_bridge_dev_get(dp) && >> + mst->msti == st->msti) { >> + if (mst->stu.state[port] == state) >> + return 0; >> + >> + mst->stu.state[port] = state; >> + mv88e6xxx_reg_lock(chip); >> + err = mv88e6xxx_stu_loadpurge(chip, &mst->stu); >> + mv88e6xxx_reg_unlock(chip); >> + return err; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + return -ENOENT; >> +} >> + >> static int mv88e6xxx_port_check_hw_vlan(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, >> u16 vid) >> { >> @@ -2437,6 +2568,12 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_leave(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, >> if (err) >> return err; >> >> + if (!vlan.valid && vlan.sid) { >> + err = mv88e6xxx_sid_put(chip, vlan.sid); >> + if (err) >> + return err; >> + } >> + >> return mv88e6xxx_g1_atu_remove(chip, vlan.fid, port, false); >> } >> >> @@ -2482,6 +2619,44 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_port_vlan_del(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port, >> return err; >> } >> >> +static int mv88e6xxx_vlan_msti_set(struct dsa_switch *ds, >> + const struct switchdev_attr *attr) >> +{ >> + const struct switchdev_vlan_attr *vattr = &attr->u.vlan_attr; >> + struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip = ds->priv; >> + struct mv88e6xxx_vtu_entry vlan; >> + u8 new_sid; >> + int err; >> + >> + mv88e6xxx_reg_lock(chip); >> + >> + err = mv88e6xxx_vtu_get(chip, vattr->vid, &vlan); >> + if (err) >> + goto unlock; >> + >> + if (!vlan.valid) { >> + err = -EINVAL; >> + goto unlock; >> + } >> + >> + err = mv88e6xxx_sid_get(chip, attr->orig_dev, vattr->msti, &new_sid); >> + if (err) >> + goto unlock; >> + >> + if (vlan.sid) { >> + err = mv88e6xxx_sid_put(chip, vlan.sid); >> + if (err) >> + goto unlock; >> + } >> + >> + vlan.sid = new_sid; >> + err = mv88e6xxx_vtu_loadpurge(chip, &vlan); > > Maybe you could move mv88e6xxx_sid_put() after this succeeds? Yep. Also made sure to avoid needless updates of the VTU entry if it already belonged to the correct SID. Thanks for the great review!