From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: b53: switchdev driver for Broadcom BCM53xx switches Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:07:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20150225080751.GC2039@nanopsycho.orion> References: <1424799727-30946-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <20150224223039.GC1332@gospo.home.greyhouse.net> <54ED017E.6000902@gmail.com> <20150225001534.GB15633@lunn.ch> <54ED19AB.7020003@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Florian Fainelli , Andrew Lunn , Andy Gospodarek , "David S. Miller" , Network Development , Jonas Gorski , Hauke Mehrtens , Felix Fietkau To: =?utf-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Return-path: Received: from mail-we0-f171.google.com ([74.125.82.171]:38269 "EHLO mail-we0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750771AbbBYIHz (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2015 03:07:55 -0500 Received: by wesw55 with SMTP id w55so1926130wes.5 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:07:54 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 08:03:48AM CET, zajec5@gmail.com wrote: >On 25 February 2015 at 01:39, Florian Fainelli = wrote: >> On 24/02/15 16:15, Andrew Lunn wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 02:55:58PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: >>>> On 24/02/15 14:50, Rafa?? Mi??ecki wrote: >>>>> As said in the commit message, these switches are really simple >>>>> devices. We can't actually send packets to the particular ports >>>>> (unless something has changed in the more recent hardware). >>>> >>>> These switches all support Broadcom tags, so you could use your ho= st CPU >>>> Ethernet MAC to send/receive packets to/from specific ports of the >>>> switch, and then this is just like DSA, but everything that you sa= y >>>> below is true. >>> >>> If this hardware does support the concept of tags compatible to the >>> existing Broadcom Starfighter 2, should we not do that? Is there a >>> good reason these chips should use a difference abstraction than >>> Starfighter 2 and the Marvell devices? >> >> No, I think that would be a reasonable thing to do, I am still a lit= tle >> unclear how the older BCM5325 and friends work with respect to broad= com >> tags, but regardless, DSA now understands switches that do not suppo= rt >> tags, so we should be good with some sort of b53 library. > >DSA doesn't allow me to use switch (hardware) VLANs. I would need to >handle all forwarding in CPU. The most powerful Broadcom MIPS SoC - >BCM4706 - can handle about 130 Mb/s. Less powerful - BCM4718A1 - only >about 50 Mb/s. >This is way too bad for performance when there is a 1 Gb/s switch and >too bad for CPU usage. Please correct me if I'm wrong Florian, but I believe that DSA does allow setting up chips to do forwarding without packets going to CPU. b53 looks like it fits nicely into DSA architecture. I believe that it should be integrated there. > >I guess the whole idea of switchdev was to allow what proposed version >of b53 does? To handle VLANs in hardware. > >--=20 >Rafa=C5=82