netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
To: Enrico Mioso <mrkiko.rs-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] 2/2 huawei_cdc_ncm: introduce new TX ncm stack
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:38:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1435239526.28594.24.camel@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.20.1506251327570.25021-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>

On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 13:44 +0200, Enrico Mioso wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Jun 2015, Oliver Neukum wrote:

> > Is there any advantage in keeping this in a single function?
> >
> I did this choice in the light of the fact I think the tx_fixup function will 
> become more complex than it is now, when aggregating frames.

Yes, but that is a reason to split the helpers up not the opposite.

> I answer here your other message to make it more convenient to read: my 
> intention for the tx_fixup function would be to:
> - aggregate frames
> - send them out when:
>  	- a timer expires

How would you do that in tx_fixup()? If a timer is required then you
need a separate function.

>  	OR
>  	- we have enough data in the aggregate, and cannot add more.

Yes.

You need a third case:
	- the interface is taken down.

But in general the logic for that is already there. So can you explain
what additional goals you have?

> This is something done in cdc_ncm.c for example.
> But here I have a question: by reading the comment in file 
> drivers/net/usb/rndis_host.c at line 572, there seem to be different opinions 
> in this matter.

That is a very old comment written for much slower devices.
rndis_host doesn't get much love nowadays.

> What to do ?
> 
> >> +int
> >> +huawei_ncm_mgmt(struct usbnet *dev,
> >> +		struct huawei_cdc_ncm_state *drvstate, struct sk_buff *skb_out, int mode) {
> >> +	struct usb_cdc_ncm_nth16 *nth16 = (struct usb_cdc_ncm_nth16 *)skb_out->data;
> >> +	struct cdc_ncm_ctx *ctx = drvstate->ctx;
> >> +	struct usb_cdc_ncm_ndp16 *ndp16 = NULL;
> >> +	int ret = -EINVAL;
> >> +	u16 ndplen, index;
> >> +
> >> +	switch (mode) {
> >> +	case NCM_INIT_FRAME:
> >> +
> >> +		/* Write a new NTH16 header */
> >> +		nth16 = (struct usb_cdc_ncm_nth16 *)memset(skb_put(skb_out, sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_nth16)), 0, sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_nth16));
> >> +		if (!nth16) {
> >> +			ret = -EINVAL;
> >> +			goto error;
> >> +		}
> >> +
> >> +		/* NTH16 signature and header length are known a-priori. */
> >> +		nth16->dwSignature = cpu_to_le32(USB_CDC_NCM_NTH16_SIGN);
> >> +		nth16->wHeaderLength = cpu_to_le16(sizeof(struct usb_cdc_ncm_nth16));
> >> +
> >> +		/* TX sequence numbering */
> >> +		nth16->wSequence = cpu_to_le16(ctx->tx_seq++);
> >> +
> >> +		/* Forget about previous SKB NDP */
> >> +		drvstate->skb_ndp = NULL;
> >
> > This is probably better done after you know you cannot fail.
> Sure. Thank you.
> >
> >> +
> >> +		/* Allocate a new NDP */
> >> +		ndp16 = kzalloc(ctx->max_ndp_size, GFP_NOIO);
> >
> > Where is this freed?
> The intention wqas to free it in the NCM_COMMIT_NDP case.
> Infact after allocating the pointer, I make a copy of it in the driver state 
> (drvstate) variable, and get back to it later.
> Is this wrong?

Well, no, but it supposes a matched commit phase. Can you guarantee
that? I was under the oppression that in that phase you want to actually
give a frame over to the hardware.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-06-25 13:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-22 22:32 [PATCH RFC 0/2] huawei_cdc_ncm: new NCM TX stack for Huawei-style NCM Enrico Mioso
2015-06-22 22:32 ` [PATCH RFC] 1/2 cdc_ncm: export cdc_ncm_align_tail Enrico Mioso
2015-06-22 22:32 ` [PATCH RFC] 2/2 huawei_cdc_ncm: introduce new TX ncm stack Enrico Mioso
     [not found]   ` <1435012335-6055-3-git-send-email-mrkiko.rs-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-25  9:49     ` Oliver Neukum
2015-06-25 11:44       ` Enrico Mioso
     [not found]         ` <alpine.LNX.2.20.1506251327570.25021-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-25 13:38           ` Oliver Neukum [this message]
2015-06-25 15:19             ` Enrico Mioso
     [not found]               ` <alpine.LNX.2.20.1506251543240.16582-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-26  8:14                 ` Oliver Neukum
2015-06-27  5:40                   ` Enrico Mioso
     [not found]                   ` <1435306442.2914.8.camel-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-30  7:45                     ` Enrico Mioso
2015-06-25  9:55     ` Oliver Neukum

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1435239526.28594.24.camel@suse.de \
    --to=oneukum-l3a5bk7wagm@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=mrkiko.rs-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).