From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F2F7F99C88 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23B4240F76; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id xn_RHZpyooB0; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Comment: SPF check N/A for local connections - client-ip=140.211.166.142; helo=lists1.osuosl.org; envelope-from=intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org; receiver= DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org A06E440F70 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=osuosl.org; s=default; t=1776531128; bh=lJT6eUZ8/0wb0gv+fWpBt8xji6v9X7XIoCnYmfmk5Gg=; h=From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=NnXNTFeYayGHe3M/udpHM0hNH3a+NCTBrcS1RBs5cIskgsAVgQdzPGjnYTHVeKr1Y 3MN+gzQ8Utn26mLrLRajB4nz3G0QIEpBLJ+KY4TjFeJpAvotlwpfS5bEZyygg4Oj+E GEbzufvN3DMOYA/pKmS1qS2ghRB7kP7FeaQyK51hAz+cX1JgGOjFdq9Av8xywb3JjW GjmKaaw5TN7CHYmT7kfQeDLMHa9U6kOoqIgZxoeajiyoiwEar6u6cbOikgh0t1UA6X C7Av5ehRLp4v53DOrc3X3hhCiJawVXaxhaoDTmqsP2fDdTAjfuyvH7RFzxoqdc/ZfC eZ5Ns7hrfxtUg== Received: from lists1.osuosl.org (lists1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.142]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06E440F70; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77E2A259 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD5440F70 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id MEiJEYzwKfkm for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:06 +0000 (UTC) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=horms@kernel.org; receiver= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp4.osuosl.org 60A0D40F6C DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 60A0D40F6C Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60A0D40F6C for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE7360138; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0DB15C19424; Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:52:00 +0000 (UTC) From: Simon Horman To: khai.wen.tan@linux.intel.com Cc: 'Simon Horman' , anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, faizal.abdul.rahim@intel.com, hong.aun.looi@intel.com, khai.wen.tan@intel.com, faizal.abdul.rahim@linux.intel.com Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2026 17:48:38 +0100 Message-ID: <20260418164837.380985-2-horms@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 In-Reply-To: <20260416015520.6090-4-khai.wen.tan@linux.intel.com> References: <20260416015520.6090-4-khai.wen.tan@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1776531124; bh=XMTZj1YxPkY22L6vssswSQjk4oTxVG3RPZgGbSOfif8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=rKzdxscKKp1giWSsuSCO3jKQUC4b8sL/u/GsH00AIPnDBiOFJoqb+6gaZ64Cr6ODv K4N1QExtkRpDDRwGOlvYHPsn+kQOOUeOFYwtQza7gw7DCyUCcQQltn08GGsU8FNvX9 XFH4j7PYOg+Mg4sCJDgKFHcgbadra4WCrK94J4fAkuf8JCj0ow8UCP1ehX1OCtAgT/ dSf1NBAr93ssqP8u0Z7P8dOZ1mFG3FAivCr/GSgm2zRV8CJE4MpIsnM1ATPPng9N68 xtinbU1VIwcPW6/o2Jqq708tUrlauGyQ7aipfDdgZ4LnQrCcJG7lco/Bhk63vOq04c TZ5P6Z7j6yNsg== X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=rKzdxscK Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 3/3] igc: add support for forcing link speed without autonegotiation X-BeenThere: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Wired Ethernet Linux Kernel Driver Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org Sender: "Intel-wired-lan" From: 'Simon Horman' This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible. Full review at: https://sashiko.dev --- igc: add support for forcing link speed without autonegotiation This commit adds support to allow users to force 10/100 Mb/s link speed and duplex via ethtool when autonegotiation is disabled. > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c > index cfcbf2fdad6ea..5bd37d1be1688 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_ethtool.c [ ... ] > @@ -2000,6 +2013,41 @@ static int igc_ethtool_get_link_ksettings(struct net_device *netdev, > return 0; > } > > +/** > + * igc_handle_autoneg_disabled - Configure forced speed/duplex settings > + * @adapter: private driver structure > + * @speed: requested speed (must be SPEED_10 or SPEED_100) > + * @duplex: requested duplex > + * > + * Records forced speed/duplex when autoneg is disabled. > + * Caller must validate speed before calling this function. > + */ > +static void igc_handle_autoneg_disabled(struct igc_adapter *adapter, u32 speed, > + u8 duplex) > +{ > + struct igc_mac_info *mac = &adapter->hw.mac; > + > + switch (speed) { > + case SPEED_10: > + mac->forced_speed_duplex = (duplex == DUPLEX_FULL) ? > + IGC_FORCED_10F : IGC_FORCED_10H; > + break; > + case SPEED_100: > + mac->forced_speed_duplex = (duplex == DUPLEX_FULL) ? > + IGC_FORCED_100F : IGC_FORCED_100H; > + break; > + default: > + WARN_ONCE(1, "Unsupported speed %u\n", speed); > + return; > + } > + > + mac->autoneg_enabled = false; > + > + /* Half-duplex cannot support flow control per IEEE 802.3 */ > + if (duplex == DUPLEX_HALF) > + adapter->hw.fc.requested_mode = igc_fc_none; > +} If userspace issues an ethtool command without specifying duplex, the duplex value can be DUPLEX_UNKNOWN. In this case, forced_speed_duplex correctly defaults to half-duplex since duplex == DUPLEX_FULL evaluates to false. However, since DUPLEX_UNKNOWN is not equal to DUPLEX_HALF, the check above fails, and the requested flow control mode remains unchanged. Could this leave flow control enabled on a forced half-duplex link, violating IEEE 802.3? Should this check be based on the resolved mac->forced_speed_duplex state instead? [ ... ] > @@ -2071,14 +2120,20 @@ igc_ethtool_set_link_ksettings(struct net_device *netdev, > } > } > > + if (cmd->base.autoneg == AUTONEG_DISABLE && > + cmd->base.speed != SPEED_10 && cmd->base.speed != SPEED_100) { > + netdev_info(dev, "Unsupported speed for forced link\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + > while (test_and_set_bit(__IGC_RESETTING, &adapter->state)) > usleep_range(1000, 2000); This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does this ad-hoc synchronization using bit flags circumvent proper locking guarantees? The networking subsystem guidelines forbid using bit flags as ad-hoc locks. Using a bit flag in a polling loop bypasses lockdep analysis, fairness, and strict memory ordering. Could this be replaced with a real synchronization mechanism like a mutex?