Re: [PATCH net-next v2 04/14] net: ethernet: qualcomm: Initialize PPE buffer management for IPQ9574

[Jie Luo <quic_luoj@quicinc.com>]

On 1/10/2025 4:11 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 05:27:14PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 09:47:11PM +0800, Luo Jie wrote:
>>> The BM (Buffer Management) config controls the pause frame generated
>>> on the PPE port. There are maximum 15 BM ports and 4 groups supported,
>>> all BM ports are assigned to group 0 by default. The number of hardware
>>> buffers configured for the port influence the threshold of the flow
>>> control for that port.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luo Jie <quic_luoj@quicinc.com>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> +/* The buffer configurations per PPE port. There are 15 BM ports and
>>> + * 4 BM groups supported by PPE. BM port (0-7) is for EDMA port 0,
>>> + * BM port (8-13) is for PPE physical port 1-6 and BM port 14 is for
>>> + * EIP port.
>>> + */
>>> +static struct ppe_bm_port_config ipq9574_ppe_bm_port_config[] = {
>>> +	{
>>> +		/* Buffer configuration for the BM port ID 0 of EDMA. */
>>> +		.port_id_start	= 0,
>>> +		.port_id_end	= 0,
>>> +		.pre_alloc	= 0,
>>> +		.in_fly_buf	= 100,
>>> +		.ceil		= 1146,
>>> +		.weight		= 7,
>>> +		.resume_offset	= 8,
>>> +		.resume_ceil	= 0,
>>> +		.dynamic	= true,
>>> +	},
>>> +	{
>>> +		/* Buffer configuration for the BM port ID 1-7 of EDMA. */
>>> +		.port_id_start	= 1,
>>> +		.port_id_end	= 7,
>>> +		.pre_alloc	= 0,
>>> +		.in_fly_buf	= 100,
>>> +		.ceil		= 250,
>>> +		.weight		= 4,
>>> +		.resume_offset	= 36,
>>> +		.resume_ceil	= 0,
>>> +		.dynamic	= true,
>>> +	},
>>> +	{
>>> +		/* Buffer configuration for the BM port ID 8-13 of PPE ports. */
>>> +		.port_id_start	= 8,
>>> +		.port_id_end	= 13,
>>> +		.pre_alloc	= 0,
>>> +		.in_fly_buf	= 128,
>>> +		.ceil		= 250,
>>> +		.weight		= 4,
>>> +		.resume_offset	= 36,
>>> +		.resume_ceil	= 0,
>>> +		.dynamic	= true,
>>> +	},
>>> +	{
>>> +		/* Buffer configuration for the BM port ID 14 of EIP. */
>>> +		.port_id_start	= 14,
>>> +		.port_id_end	= 14,
>>> +		.pre_alloc	= 0,
>>> +		.in_fly_buf	= 40,
>>> +		.ceil		= 250,
>>> +		.weight		= 4,
>>> +		.resume_offset	= 36,
>>> +		.resume_ceil	= 0,
>>> +		.dynamic	= true,
>>> +	},
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static int ppe_config_bm_threshold(struct ppe_device *ppe_dev, int bm_port_id,
>>> +				   struct ppe_bm_port_config port_cfg)
>>> +{
>>> +	u32 reg, val, bm_fc_val[2];
>>> +	int ret;
>>> +
>>> +	/* Configure BM flow control related threshold. */
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_WEIGHT(bm_fc_val, port_cfg.weight);
>>
>> Hi Luo Jie,
>>
>> When compiling with W=1 for x86_32 and ARM (32bit)
>> (but, curiously not x86_64 or arm64), gcc-14 complains that
>> bm_fc_val is uninitialised, I believe due to the line above and
>> similar lines below.
>>
>> In file included from drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c:10:
>> In function 'u32p_replace_bits',
>>      inlined from 'ppe_config_bm_threshold' at drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c:112:2:
>> ./include/linux/bitfield.h:189:15: warning: 'bm_fc_val' is used uninitialized [-Wuninitialized]
>>    189 |         *p = (*p & ~to(field)) | type##_encode_bits(val, field);        \
>>        |               ^~
>> ./include/linux/bitfield.h:198:9: note: in expansion of macro '____MAKE_OP'
>>    198 |         ____MAKE_OP(u##size,u##size,,)
>>        |         ^~~~~~~~~~~
>> ./include/linux/bitfield.h:201:1: note: in expansion of macro '__MAKE_OP'
>>    201 | __MAKE_OP(32)
>>        | ^~~~~~~~~
>> drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c: In function 'ppe_config_bm_threshold':
>> drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c:108:23: note: 'bm_fc_val' declared here
>>    108 |         u32 reg, val, bm_fc_val[2];
>>        |                       ^~~~~~~~~
>>
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_RESUME_OFFSET(bm_fc_val, port_cfg.resume_offset);
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_RESUME_THRESHOLD(bm_fc_val, port_cfg.resume_ceil);
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_DYNAMIC(bm_fc_val, port_cfg.dynamic);
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_REACT_LIMIT(bm_fc_val, port_cfg.in_fly_buf);
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_PRE_ALLOC(bm_fc_val, port_cfg.pre_alloc);
>>> +
>>> +	/* Configure low/high bits of the ceiling for the BM port. */
>>> +	val = FIELD_PREP(GENMASK(2, 0), port_cfg.ceil);
>>
>> The value of port_cfg.ceil is 250 or 1146, as set in
>> ipq9574_ppe_bm_port_config. clang-19 W=1 builds complain that this
>> value is too large for the field (3 bits).
>>
>> drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/ppe/ppe_config.c:120:8: error: call to '__compiletime_assert_925' declared with 'error' attribute: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>>    120 |         val = FIELD_PREP(GENMASK(2, 0), port_cfg.ceil);
>>        |               ^
>> ./include/linux/bitfield.h:115:3: note: expanded from macro 'FIELD_PREP'
>>    115 |                 __BF_FIELD_CHECK(_mask, 0ULL, _val, "FIELD_PREP: ");    \
>>        |                 ^
>> ./include/linux/bitfield.h:68:3: note: expanded from macro '__BF_FIELD_CHECK'
>>     68 |                 BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(__builtin_constant_p(_val) ?           \
>>        |                 ^
>> ./include/linux/build_bug.h:39:37: note: expanded from macro 'BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG'
>>     39 | #define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, msg) compiletime_assert(!(cond), msg)
>>        |                                     ^
>> note: (skipping 1 expansions in backtrace; use -fmacro-backtrace-limit=0 to see all)
>> ././include/linux/compiler_types.h:530:2: note: expanded from macro '_compiletime_assert'
>>    530 |         __compiletime_assert(condition, msg, prefix, suffix)
>>        |         ^
>> ././include/linux/compiler_types.h:523:4: note: expanded from macro '__compiletime_assert'
>>    523 |                         prefix ## suffix();                             \
>>        |                         ^
>> <scratch space>:95:1: note: expanded from here
>>     95 | __compiletime_assert_925
>>        | ^
>> 1 error generated
>>
>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_CEILING_LOW(bm_fc_val, val);
>>> +	val = FIELD_PREP(GENMASK(10, 3), port_cfg.ceil);
> 
> One more thing - I was pondering this over dinner.
> 
> I believe that the above will write the bits 0-7 of port_cfg.ceil
> to bits 3-10 of val. I am guessing that the reverse mapping of
> bits is intended.
> 

Thanks for catching this, yes, I will update this code. And also run the
32 bit ARCH check on the patches.

>>> +	PPE_BM_PORT_FC_SET_CEILING_HIGH(bm_fc_val, val);
>>> +
>>> +	reg = PPE_BM_PORT_FC_CFG_TBL_ADDR + PPE_BM_PORT_FC_CFG_TBL_INC * bm_port_id;
>>> +	ret = regmap_bulk_write(ppe_dev->regmap, reg,
>>> +				bm_fc_val, ARRAY_SIZE(bm_fc_val));
>>> +	if (ret)
>>> +		return ret;
>>> +
>>> +	/* Assign the default group ID 0 to the BM port. */
>>> +	val = FIELD_PREP(PPE_BM_PORT_GROUP_ID_SHARED_GROUP_ID, 0);
>>> +	reg = PPE_BM_PORT_GROUP_ID_ADDR + PPE_BM_PORT_GROUP_ID_INC * bm_port_id;
>>> +	ret = regmap_update_bits(ppe_dev->regmap, reg,
>>> +				 PPE_BM_PORT_GROUP_ID_SHARED_GROUP_ID,
>>> +				 val);
>>> +	if (ret)
>>> +		return ret;
>>> +
>>> +	/* Enable BM port flow control. */
>>> +	val = FIELD_PREP(PPE_BM_PORT_FC_MODE_EN, true);
>>> +	reg = PPE_BM_PORT_FC_MODE_ADDR + PPE_BM_PORT_FC_MODE_INC * bm_port_id;
>>> +
>>> +	return regmap_update_bits(ppe_dev->regmap, reg,
>>> +				  PPE_BM_PORT_FC_MODE_EN,
>>> +				  val);
>>> +}
>>
>> ...
>>
>> -- 
>> pw-bot: changes-requested
>>